'No doubt' Syria used chemical arms, says US Vice-President Joe Biden

[MikeOboe57]

Max Boot, a senior fellow in national security studies at the private Council on Foreign Relations in New York, founded in 1921, has pretty well analyzed the regional ramifications of a military action against the Assad regime for their use of chemical weapons.

Here is some of his wide ranging analysis..

Start with Syria's supposedly formidable air defense. Given the ease with which Israel penetrated those defenses in 1982, during the Lebanon War, and in 2007, to take out the al-Kibar nuclear reactor, it is unlikely that the systems would pose that much of a challenge to the world's most sophisticated and powerful air force.

The U.S. Air Force had no trouble taking out Saddam Hussein's air defenses on two occasions, and those, like Syria's, were constructed largely on the Russian model.

Right, it will be a piece of cake.

Let's have a closer look at this guy:

"Boot supports what he calls American imperialism based on nation building and the pursuit of spreading democracy across the non-Western world." (wikipedia)

There is not a single US military blunder that Mr. Boot had not ardently supported. His analysis of Syria's air defence capabilities is based on a 30 year old event and a lucky "peace time raid" on an unsuspecting Syria by one of the world's best fighter pilots. Wow, what a solid basis to work with. He also forgets that in the 1st Gulf War Saddam's AAA and SAMs brought down a substantial number of allied aircraft, instead he mentions two later occasions when Iraq was crumbling under sanctions and the armed forces were in shambles after the crippling losses they had sustained.

Why does this smartass not look at the outcome of these pathetic attempts at "nation building" and "spreading of democracy" and rethink his dumb neocon BS?

The world does not need another Iraq or another Libya.

How brain dead does one have to be to not smell a rat when a bearded islamist fighter states in an interview: "We ask our American friends for help"? They need the idiot with the big stick to save their asses and will kick him in the groin right afterwards, like in Iraq and in Libya.

[Publicus]

Max Boot, a senior fellow in national security studies at the private Council on Foreign Relations in New York, founded in 1921, has pretty well analyzed the regional ramifications of a military action against the Assad regime for their use of chemical weapons.

Here is some of his wide ranging analysis..

Start with Syria's supposedly formidable air defense. Given the ease with which Israel penetrated those defenses in 1982, during the Lebanon War, and in 2007, to take out the al-Kibar nuclear reactor, it is unlikely that the systems would pose that much of a challenge to the world's most sophisticated and powerful air force.

The U.S. Air Force had no trouble taking out Saddam Hussein's air defenses on two occasions, and those, like Syria's, were constructed largely on the Russian model.

Right, it will be a piece of cake.

Let's have a closer look at this guy:

"Boot supports what he calls American imperialism based on nation building and the pursuit of spreading democracy across the non-Western world." (wikipedia)

There is not a single US military blunder that Mr. Boot had not ardently supported. His analysis of Syria's air defence capabilities is based on a 30 year old event and a lucky "peace time raid" on an unsuspecting Syria by one of the world's best fighter pilots. Wow, what a solid basis to work with. He also forgets that in the 1st Gulf War Saddam's AAA and SAMs brought down a substantial number of allied aircraft, instead he mentions two later occasions when Iraq was crumbling under sanctions and the armed forces were in shambles after the crippling losses they had sustained.

Why does this smartass not look at the outcome of these pathetic attempts at "nation building" and "spreading of democracy" and rethink his dumb neocon BS?

The world does not need another Iraq or another Libya.

How brain dead does one have to be to not smell a rat when a bearded islamist fighter states in an interview: "We ask our American friends for help"? They need the idiot with the big stick to save their asses and will kick him in the groin right afterwards, like in Iraq and in Libya.

The worst Middle East dictators have the best Russian military equipment yet they keep getting their <deleted> kicked, from Saddam to Assad.

Russia is building the nuclear power plant in Iran and had been building the nuclear plant in Syria the Israelis knocked out and which Boot refers to.

Syria's generals and Baath party leaders all have scrambled into underground bunkers.

The Tomahawk missies will target the 30,000 loyal Alawite forces in Assad's unreliable army, the troops who Assad has called on again and again to attack rebel strongholds. The launchers of chemical weapons will be targeted. The targeting by the Pentagon is not only effective, it will be devastating to Assad and his regime's military.

Again getting through the Russian air defenses Syria has will indeed be another piece of cake, yes.

[Loptr]

I posted this elsewhere, but linking it again here seems appropriate.

Just who is pulling the strings in the ME? It appears it's the Saudis, once again.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-27/meet-saudi-arabias-bandar-bin-sultan-puppetmaster-behind-syrian-war

Meet Saudi Arabia's Bandar bin Sultan: The Puppetmaster Behind The Syrian War

Yesterday the Telegraph's Evans-Pritchard dug up a note that we had posted almost a month ago, relating to the "secret" meeting between Saudi Arabia and Russia, in which Saudi's influential intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan met with Putin and regaled him with gifts, including a multi-billion arms deal and a promise that Saudi is "ready to help Moscow play a bigger role in the Middle East at a time when the United States is disengaging from the region", if only Putin would agree to give up his alliance with Syria's al-Assad and let Syria take over, ostensibly including control of the country's all important natgas transit infrastructure. What was not emphasized by the Telegraph is that Putin laughed at the proposal and brushed aside the Saudi desperation by simply saying "nyet." However, what neither the Telegraph, nor we three weeks ago, picked up on, is what happened after Putin put Syria in its place. We now know, and it's a doozy.

[MikeOboe57]

Right, it will be a piece of cake.

Let's have a closer look at this guy:

"Boot supports what he calls American imperialism based on nation building and the pursuit of spreading democracy across the non-Western world." (wikipedia)

There is not a single US military blunder that Mr. Boot had not ardently supported. His analysis of Syria's air defence capabilities is based on a 30 year old event and a lucky "peace time raid" on an unsuspecting Syria by one of the world's best fighter pilots. Wow, what a solid basis to work with. He also forgets that in the 1st Gulf War Saddam's AAA and SAMs brought down a substantial number of allied aircraft, instead he mentions two later occasions when Iraq was crumbling under sanctions and the armed forces were in shambles after the crippling losses they had sustained.

Why does this smartass not look at the outcome of these pathetic attempts at "nation building" and "spreading of democracy" and rethink his dumb neocon BS?

The world does not need another Iraq or another Libya.

How brain dead does one have to be to not smell a rat when a bearded islamist fighter states in an interview: "We ask our American friends for help"? They need the idiot with the big stick to save their asses and will kick him in the groin right afterwards, like in Iraq and in Libya.

The worst Middle East dictators have the best Russian military equipment yet they keep getting their <deleted> kicked, from Saddam to Assad.

Russia is building the nuclear power plant in Iran and had been building the nuclear plant in Syria the Israelis knocked out and which Boot refers to.

Syria's generals and Baath party leaders all have scrambled into underground bunkers.

The Tomahawk missies will target the 30,000 loyal Alawite forces in Assad's unreliable army, the troops who Assad has called on again and again to attack rebel strongholds. The launchers of chemical weapons will be targeted. The targeting by the Pentagon is not only effective, it will be devastating to Assad and his regime's military.

Again getting through the Russian air defenses Syria has will indeed be another piece of cake, yes.

Like Mr. Boot you fail to see the whole picture. What has come out of this "ass-kicking"? Iraq is a failed state, torn apart by sectarian violence and terrorized by indiscriminate daily killing of civilians. The northern Kurdish provinces are practically autonomous - to Turkey's great displeasure. Libya is close to being a failed state. The Government of no name puppets is powerless to exercise its authority. Large groups of armed militias terrorize the country and willfully arrest and torture anyone they suspect to be a former Gaddhafi sympathizer. The citizens of the town of Tawergha have been expelled from their homes and are forced to live in tents in the desert - because they allegedly supported Gaddhafi. Who cares? America has set its sights on another juicy target.

Of course in Syria everything will be totally different. Once the Tomahawks and Cruise Missiles, the Paveways and Mavericks have flattened the countryside happy citizens will emerge from the rubble and celebrate their liberation from the yoke of Assad. They will put all their petty grievances aside and build a free democratic and peaceful society. And they lived happily everafter.

We both know that it will be like another Libya or Iraq. Only you refuse to admit it. Encouraging an idiot with a torch to enter the gunpowder storage is not smart.

[Publicus]

The Middle East is in its worst turmoil and chaos since World War 2.

Assad and his group can no longer govern Syria. Is that not obvious?

Assad and his group have been unable to govern Syria for a significant period of time now, is that not obvious?

Chaos in Syria will occur whether Assad and his group remain, collapse, or are toppled.

Assad and his group need to go. That's the immediate situation.

It's either the chaos of the status quo or the chaos of radical change.

Either way we get chaos for some period of time.

As I've said, let Syria dissolve. No one in the West will miss a Syria aligned with Iran and Russia.

Turkey is armed to the teeth with Patriot anti-missile batteries aimed to protect against Syria. Israel the same. Jordan and Lebanon are suffering through the Assad absurdity.

The Middle East is being shaken to its foundations, which is necessary and which has been building for decades. It's a process, not a permanent snapshot situation.

[hawker9000]

Don't laugh. The White House is frantically putting together a strategy to sell the American public on the idea of bombing yet another far-off country.

Somehow a song won't be enough, even "Good Old Shoe".

Obama struggles to justify Syria attack to skeptical Americans, Congress

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/27/white-house-obama-still-undecided-syria-response/

At least this taking the heat off the NSA problem. Maybe the NSA could pitch in here and provide some "intelligence"?

Congress is not in session (and most of those congressmen, the ones who aren't on taxpayer-funded boondoggles somewhere, are back home probably getting an earful). Why do you think Obama's doing this now? Everybody hates Congress, but when they're not in town, even worse things happen...

[chuckd]

Max Boot, a senior fellow in national security studies at the private Council on Foreign Relations in New York, founded in 1921, has pretty well analyzed the regional ramifications of a military action against the Assad regime for their use of chemical weapons.

Here is some of his wide ranging analysis..

Start with Syria's supposedly formidable air defense. Given the ease with which Israel penetrated those defenses in 1982, during the Lebanon War, and in 2007, to take out the al-Kibar nuclear reactor, it is unlikely that the systems would pose that much of a challenge to the world's most sophisticated and powerful air force.

The U.S. Air Force had no trouble taking out Saddam Hussein's air defenses on two occasions, and those, like Syria's, were constructed largely on the Russian model.

I haven't found your links to support all these posts you are making on Mr.Boot. Please provide your source material.

Thank you.

[Publicus]

Max Boot, a senior fellow in national security studies at the private Council on Foreign Relations in New York, founded in 1921, has pretty well analyzed the regional ramifications of a military action against the Assad regime for their use of chemical weapons.

Here is some of his wide ranging analysis..

Start with Syria's supposedly formidable air defense. Given the ease with which Israel penetrated those defenses in 1982, during the Lebanon War, and in 2007, to take out the al-Kibar nuclear reactor, it is unlikely that the systems would pose that much of a challenge to the world's most sophisticated and powerful air force.

The U.S. Air Force had no trouble taking out Saddam Hussein's air defenses on two occasions, and those, like Syria's, were constructed largely on the Russian model.

I haven't found your links to support all these posts you are making on Mr.Boot. Please provide your source material.

Thank you.

I have the link, I simply overlooked providing it. I always try to provide links but got occupied by the quote function in making my posts.

If stop and frisk is the policy, then this is the link officer, no problem. Be sure to check every comma too.

http://www.cfr.org/syria/pentagons-cold-feet-syria/p27666

[Scott]

People who follow other people around the forum are called stalkers and stalking is against the forum rules.

Impersonating a moderator will also get you into trouble.

[Steely Dan]

Looks like the 'no doubt' is really considerable doubt, but so long as the end justifies the means.

The Obama administration has selectively used intelligence to justify military strikes on Syria, former military officers with access to the original intelligence reports say, in a manner that goes far beyond what critics charged the Bush administration of doing in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war.

According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain, France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israel’s famed Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/29/verify-chemical-weapons-use-before-unleashing-the-dogs-of-war/#ixzz2dSuwum4t

[mania]

Looks like the 'no doubt' is really considerable doubt, but so long as the end justifies the means.

The Obama administration has selectively used intelligence to justify military strikes on Syria, former military officers with access to the original intelligence reports say, in a manner that goes far beyond what critics charged the Bush administration of doing in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war.

According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain, France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israels famed Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/29/verify-chemical-weapons-use-before-unleashing-the-dogs-of-war/#ixzz2dSuwum4t

Wow

It just gets worse & worse doesn't it?

Is this all ultimately just a distraction from all

his self inflicted problems? Benghazi,IRS,NSA etc?

Really makes one wonder.

[Exsexyman]

Looks like the 'no doubt' is really considerable doubt, but so long as the end justifies the means.

The Obama administration has selectively used intelligence to justify military strikes on Syria, former military officers with access to the original intelligence reports say, in a manner that goes far beyond what critics charged the Bush administration of doing in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war.

According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain, France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israel’s famed Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/29/verify-chemical-weapons-use-before-unleashing-the-dogs-of-war/#ixzz2dSuwum4t

This is breaking news from the Associated Press and other agencies. Given the journalist's credentials it probably should not be dismissed out of hand. Given the Saudi's backing for the insurgents, and their constant pressure on the US to get involved it is more than plausible.

http://breakingnews.sy/en/article/24491.html

[giggles]

a playground of schoolkids napalmed by fighter jets , looks like the UK commons vote encouraged them more

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-reports-of-napalmlike-bomb-attack-on-aleppo-playground-emerge-after-mps-vote-against-military-action-8790841.html

WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES

A playground full of children in northern Syria has been bombed by a fighter jet with a napalm-like substance, according to disturbing new footage captured by the BBC Panorama programme.

Eye witnesses described how a jet had passed the school in Aleppo numerous times, as if it searching for a target, before it dropped the bomb.

At least 10 children were killed and many more were injured, according to the report from Ian Pannell and cameraman Darren Conway.

A large number of those who survived had burns to more than 50 per cent of their bodies, meaning that they were more likely than not to die as well.

[rubin]

MOSCOW, August 30 (RIA Novosti) – US President Barack Obama should be stripped of his Nobel Peace Prize if the United States carries out a military strike on Syria, Alexei Pushkov, head of the Russian parliament’s International Affairs Committee, said Friday.

“If the United States attacks Syria without UN approval, the global community should demand that the Nobel Committee strip Obama of his peace prize,” the senior lawmaker wrote on his Twitter page.

He added that the United States did not have the right to speak on behalf of NATO or the global community.

“The United Kingdom’s refusal to support aggression against Syria is a serious blow to the arguments of [armed intervention] supporters in both NATO and the US,” Pushkov wrote.

UK Prime Minister David Cameron suffered a historic defeat in a vote on Syrian intervention on Thursday, when the UK parliament voted down a motion calling for a “strong humanitarian response” to the two-year civil war.

Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” according to a statement on the prize’s website.

Activist site RootsAction.org has gathered nearly 24,000 signatures on a petition to revoke Obama’s peace prize because “his increasing intervention in Syria promises the loss of even more than the nearly 100,000 lives already needlessly sacrificed.”

[Jingthing]

Who cares about his peace prize?

[JetsetBkk]

Kerry's speech: pathetic. No proof, just rhetoric. Truly a low-point in US diplomacy. Embarrassing to watch, actually.

[baboon]

Kim Jong-un is back in the headlines. Come ON! We have to bomb somebody! How else can we get more taxpayers' money?

[Jingthing]

Kerry's speech: pathetic. No proof, just rhetoric. Truly a low-point in US diplomacy. Embarrassing to watch, actually.

What exactly is wrong with the speech?

The audience for this speech, BTW, was mostly to the DOMESTIC American audience. That's not a diplomatic matter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/kerry-high-confidence-syria-used-chemical-weapons/2013/08/30/10632508-119b-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_video.html

John Kerry in his speech suggested everyone read this document. John Kerry is no war monger. Anyone who knows John Kerry knows that for sure.

[Jingthing]

Deleted quote edited out

Of course it is widely understood that Putin is a strong man dictator, but that's really beside the point, as for whatever reasons the majority of Russians seem to love that kind of thing.

This here is a foreign policy matter.

Surely you do understand that Russia with it's long close ties to Assad has no credibility at all on the international stage in anything they say to defend Assad including the denial games being played.

So far, this is the evidence offered publicly by the U.S. government:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/syria-chemical-weapons-assessment-document-96088.html

[Dancealot]

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/syria-chemical-weapons-assessment-document-96088.html

This is the evidence offered publicly? Give me a break...

The inspectors have been there for 4 days already....

[F430murci]

Of course Assad did it. Jeez. It's cool if you are anti US and against US intervention for personal reasons, but pleas stop with the no evidence bs.

The really sad part about all of this crap is that it is purely political. If Bama said we are not getting involved, the Republicans along with a lot of two faced bastards that just hate Bama would be saying "Bama is weak and we need to bomb."

That is what makes me suck. This has nothing to do with right or wrong. It is just drawn along political lines even though the consequences are unbelievable suffering by many many innocent civilians and children.

I mean seriously. It is amazing how all of those that have been against Baama since day one are unanimously against intervention just because he is for it. Shameful.

[Publicus]

a playground of schoolkids napalmed by fighter jets , looks like the UK commons vote encouraged them more

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-reports-of-napalmlike-bomb-attack-on-aleppo-playground-emerge-after-mps-vote-against-military-action-8790841.html

WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES

A playground full of children in northern Syria has been bombed by a fighter jet with a napalm-like substance, according to disturbing new footage captured by the BBC Panorama programme.

Eye witnesses described how a jet had passed the school in Aleppo numerous times, as if it searching for a target, before it dropped the bomb.

At least 10 children were killed and many more were injured, according to the report from Ian Pannell and cameraman Darren Conway.

A large number of those who survived had burns to more than 50 per cent of their bodies, meaning that they were more likely than not to die as well.

Yes, the message from Assad and his goons is that if you oppose us we will kill and maim your children.

Mass brutality by a monstrous dictator and his cold blooded regime.

This is what Putin supports without hesitation or reservation. This is what Putin defends and protects. Like minded people.

[Ulysses G.]

I mean seriously. It is amazing how all of those that have been against Baama since day one are unanimously against intervention just because he is for it. Shameful.

Actually, it is far from unanimous among Republicans - many are in favor of a devastating strike - and many Democrats are also against intervention. One of the main complaints about it is that there have been so many leaks by the administration - nothing new there - about our tactics that Assad is moving all his assets. Most likely, a very limited, cosmetic strike (which has been extensively advertised) will accomplish very little to degrade Assad's capabilities.

It is looking more and more like this complete screw-up has little to do with American national interests and is all about saving Obama from being humiliated personally because Assad called his bluff on the red line.

[Publicus]

Signals and geospatial intelligence refers to electronic communications intercepts and satellite views of activities on the ground as well as other hardware based intelligence gathering techniques.

Of Assad's 300,000 man army, most are poorly trained and equipped conscripts who haven't much of a role in the conflict. It's the special battalions of 30,000 of Alawite soldiers who do most of the fighting, being called on again and again to attack rebel strongholds or to defend government strongholds. These 30,000 Alawite soldiers have been carrying the great burden of the fight for almost 30 consecutive months and are depleted, tired, underequipped, under provided, under supplied, exhausted, over extended.

So it's no surprise that the Assad regime would resort to chemical warfare.

U.S. Releases Detailed Intelligence on Syrian Chemical Attack

A summary of the intelligence assessment said its conclusions were based on “human, signals and geospatial intelligence as well as a significant body of open-source reporting.”

Among the findings, the summary said, was intelligence that Syrian chemical weapons personnel had plotted the attack for three days in advance, partly out of frustration that the use of conventional weapons in Ghouta, one of the Syrian towns hit last week, had failed to dislodge insurgents.

The intelligence found “activities that we assess were associated with preparations for a chemical weapons attack” in the three days before the weapons were unleashed, the summary said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0

[Publicus]

I mean seriously. It is amazing how all of those that have been against Baama since day one are unanimously against intervention just because he is for it. Shameful.

Actually, it is far from unanimous among Republicans - many are in favor of a devastating strike - and many Democrats are also against intervention. One of the main complaints about it is that there have been so many leaks by the administration - nothing new there - about our tactics that Assad is moving all his assets. Most likely, a very limited, cosmetic strike (which has been extensively advertised) will accomplish very little to degrade Assad's capabilities.

It is looking more and more like this complete screw-up has little to do with American national interests and is all about saving Obama from being humiliated personally because Assad called his bluff on the red line.

The present NBC scientific survey finds that 58% of Americans believe a red line should exist concerning the use of chemical weapons, and that a country that uses chemical weapons should be punished, to include the possibility of military action by the United States.

This is a matter of the views of the president and the people. The views in this matter coincide.

There's nothing personal in this.

[JDGRUEN]

NBC poll: Nearly 80 percent want congressional approval on Syria

Fifty percent of Americans believe the U.S. should not intervene

... a whopping 79 percent of respondents — including nearly 7 in 10 Democrats and 90 percent of Republicans — say the president should be required to receive congressional approval before taking any action.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/30/20256971-nbc-poll-nearly-80-percent-want-congressional-approval-on-syria?lite

[Ulysses G.]

I mean seriously. It is amazing how all of those that have been against Baama since day one are unanimously against intervention just because he is for it. Shameful.

Actually, it is far from unanimous among Republicans - many are in favor of a devastating strike - and many Democrats are also against intervention. One of the main complaints about it is that there have been so many leaks by the administration - nothing new there - about our tactics that Assad is moving all his assets. Most likely, a very limited, cosmetic strike (which has been extensively advertised) will accomplish very little to degrade Assad's capabilities.

It is looking more and more like this complete screw-up has little to do with American national interests and is all about saving Obama from being humiliated personally because Assad called his bluff on the red line.

The present NBC scientific survey finds that 58% of Americans believe a red line should exist concerning the use of chemical weapons, and that a country that uses chemical weapons should be punished, to include the possibility of military action by the United States.

I do too. I also believe that the "punishment" should be more than a cosmetic pinprick to save the commander-in-chief's vanity. From all indications, an effective military action is not going to happen here.

[Publicus]

NBC poll: Nearly 80 percent want congressional approval on Syria

Fifty percent of Americans believe the U.S. should not intervene

... a whopping 79 percent of respondents — including nearly 7 in 10 Democrats and 90 percent of Republicans — say the president should be required to receive congressional approval before taking any action.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/30/20256971-nbc-poll-nearly-80-percent-want-congressional-approval-on-syria?lite

If Syria were an Iraq type of military operation, which the limited and focused action Prez Obama proposes against Assad in Syria is not.

This is not Iraq.

Republican party House Speaker John Boehner sent a 14 question letter to Prez Obama concerning the missile strike option but has not called a vote of the House.

The Senate leadership of Democrats and Republicans have not called for a vote of that body.

The American people are not clamoring for a vote by the Congress, which anyway is in recess scattered all over the country and the world.

The sentiment anyway indicates the Congress would vote yes.

Either way, the War Powers Resolution of 1974 authorizes the president to initiate a military action on his own for up to 60 days before seeking the approval of the Congress, either to continue the military action or to terminate it while providing a written justification of the action.

The American people know and understand this long standing principle and practice.

Prez Obama has the constitutional authority to act in this matter in his capacity as commander in chief. Because this is not Iraq, the Congress are bystanders until their legal and constitutional role kicks in 60 days after the fact.

[Publicus]

I mean seriously. It is amazing how all of those that have been against Baama since day one are unanimously against intervention just because he is for it. Shameful.

Actually, it is far from unanimous among Republicans - many are in favor of a devastating strike - and many Democrats are also against intervention. One of the main complaints about it is that there have been so many leaks by the administration - nothing new there - about our tactics that Assad is moving all his assets. Most likely, a very limited, cosmetic strike (which has been extensively advertised) will accomplish very little to degrade Assad's capabilities.

It is looking more and more like this complete screw-up has little to do with American national interests and is all about saving Obama from being humiliated personally because Assad called his bluff on the red line.

The present NBC scientific survey finds that 58% of Americans believe a red line should exist concerning the use of chemical weapons, and that a country that uses chemical weapons should be punished, to include the possibility of military action by the United States.

I do too. I also believe that the "punishment" should be more than a cosmetic pinprick to save the commander-in-chief's vanity. From all indications, an effective military action is not going to happen here.

"Vanity" is a manufactured issue by the perpetual opponents of the president.

Prez Obama and the majority of Americans have drawn a red line over the use of chemical weapons by a government. Both Prez Obama and the majority of the American people say a government that uses chemical weapons must be punished, to include the military option.

Iran with its nuclear program is watching to see if the United States means what it says.

North Korea with its nuclear program is watching to see if the United States means what it says.

Hezbollah with its loyalties to Iran and Syria is watching to see if the United States means what it says.

Putin in his support of Assad and his brutal and cruel regime is watching to see if the United States means what it says.

Prez Obama knows what he is doing and the majority of the American people - as always - support him.

There's nothing personal in this. It's strictly business.

[ABCer]

US is getting quite euphoric about its newly acquired position of a new bully on the block. Or a self-appointed sheriff of the world. Or a champion of their weird type of Democracy.

All previous attempts have failed. But they persist in doing it again.

I do not believe US Gov't is stupid. Hence, there is only one possible answer to their continuing efforts: chaos and destabilization must be their objective. It's that simple!

One day the Great Favorite will get snubbed by a little unknown Karate Kid. When? Where? How? - I don't know. But it will happen...

Back to the topic.

Not being a great fan of Syria or its President, but having seen multiple previous baseless "oops, it was wrong" actions by the Leader of the World, I do know that

- there probably are (?) some material samples of chemicals in environment and in human remains;

- Joe Biden may be (?) honestly having no doubts;

- Assad could have used (?) these chemicals;

- Assad could have been (?) set up by any internal or external forces;

- until all of the above question marks are cleared - no external military intervention is warranted;

- the only way to clear above questions is to present a TAG attached to each and every sample with a name.

My analysis of the situation is going to change with more facts and evidence, not with more loud slogans.

So far it tells me: - Assad isn't stupid. He knows the attitude of the World. The same can be said about the Organizers of the Opposition.

Extremely unlikely in these circumstances for Assad to use WMD. Forget about sentimental 'on his own people!!!'. It's politics.

Now, if you will apply the same way of thinking to the Opposition - a provocation would be in their interests. Using (or seemingly using) WMD would put Assad into the line of fire of all Nations. And it did.

Russians are masters of provocation not less than Americans. They know something, hence warn not to act in haste. Question is - how strong is the US desire to destabilize another country?

Is Obama really different from Bush? Or does it really mean anything who sits in the White House? Methinks not.