Official Syria thread of evidence supporting war

[AdmiralViscen]

I don't think he's enthusastic about it himself

[Mandark]

Mandark, I don't know if I would say there is a deliberate, coordinated effort to prolong the war

Okay, I misread you then.  Cause there's a vast leap to be made from "the US wants to contain Iran strategically" and "the US will allow the Syrian civil war to drag on largely because doing so hurts Iran."

We're not talking about vast conspiracies, but about policymaking, which is not a completely transparent process but in many respects is an observable one.  And again, there is to my knowledge literally no evidence for that second statement above.  Which ought to matter to anyone trying to suss out the priorities and motivations of the folks making these decisions.

[Mandark]

"the US will allow the Syrian civil war to drag on largely because doing so hurts Iran."

Also, I'm just generally wary of hyper-realist analysis in general, but feel like explaining why would be a one-way ticket to tl;dr incoherence on my part.

[Phoenix Dark]

Obama making a statement in 5-10 minutes
http://www.whitehouse.gov/live

[Human Snorenado]

Supposedly there is no imminent strike, he's just talking about his reasoning going forward or some shit

Whatever

I don't get why people are so anxious about this shit, like I said you'll have 10 years or so to be angry about this war

[Mupepe]

Obama is really on black people time today

[Verdigris Murder]

Something's happened.

They're all going to have a big important meeting, and actually do nothing.

[Verdigris Murder]

Boots on the ground.

[Human Snorenado]

Well shit.  Of all the outcomes, that (wanting to use force, but asking Congress for approval) was the least likely.  Gonna be interesting to hear from all of these GOP peaceniks in the coming days and weeks.

[Phoenix Dark]

Our hopes rest in the hands of John Boehner, fellas.

[Human Snorenado]

Oh, they're totally going to give him authorization. 

[Phoenix Dark]

Voting for a war a year before congressional elections? I doubt it.

[TakingBackSunday]

I'm glad that they're taking it to Congress 

[Human Snorenado]

Voting for a war a year before congressional elections? I doubt it.

Let's put some money on it.  I'll give you 10:1.

[Phoenix Dark]

Could be the ultimate get out of jail free card.

[Dickie Dee]

[Phoenix Dark]

The wait for Congress also gives Obama a chance to wait on UN chemical report, without having to say he's waiting on the UN.

https://twitter.com/NPRinskeep/status/373869558513168384

Good point.

[Human Snorenado]

Obama to Congress:

[TakingBackSunday]

Buys time and enhances legitimacy. Obama makes me swoon!

(Image removed from quote.)

I'm not sure how you're getting that sort of message from my posts...

[Phoenix Dark]

nah The Business is an Obummer fanboy

[Great Rumbler]

I'm glad that they're taking it to Congress 

It'll be interesting to see whether war-mongering wins out against Obama-Mania.

[Diunx]

Obama keeps sounding like a huge fucking pussy to me, just assassinate the asshole dictator cold war style and be done with it.

[Flannel Boy]

Obama keeps sounding like a huge fucking pussy to me, just assassinate the asshole dictator cold war style and be done with it.

Let's not call for the assassination of Obama!

[Trent Dole]

[Human Snorenado]

Just like I thought, the entire congressional leadership has signed on to supporting a strike, and the dynamic duo of Grandpa Walnuts McCain and Huckleberry Hound Graham are gonna be the bagmen for Senate GOP support.  If this thing dies, it will be due to enough progressive caucus dems allying with teahadists in the House to sink it.

[Phoenix Dark]

I was dead wrong about that, wow. I had hoped the House at least would call the bluff and refuse to sign off on this; basically the House telling Obama if he wants to save face he needs to do it by himself.

Kerry also refusing to rule out boots on the ground. If Assad is toppled, someone has to secure the weapons; it's similar to Pakistan in that sense. This is probably going to get ugly.

[Joe Molotov]

Welp...gotta look at the silver lining. At least most of the Bore is too old for the draft.

[Positive Touch]

bye andrex :googlecry

[Brehvolution]

- Military Industrial Complex

[Positive Touch]

welp, this turned out to be a joke. shoulda listened to my gut

[Great Rumbler]

Kerry also refusing to rule out boots on the ground. If Assad is toppled, someone has to secure the weapons; it's similar to Pakistan in that sense. This is probably going to get ugly.

Here's the details on that:

Secretary of State John Kerry on Tuesday appeared to leave the door open to the U.S. deploying ground troops in Syria in the event the country "imploded, for instance."

“In the event Syria imploded, for instance or in the event there was a threat of a chemical weapons cache falling into the hands of somebody else and it was clearly in the interest of our allies — all of us, the British, the French, and others. I don’t want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to the President of the United States to secure our country," Kerry told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, debating whether to authorize President Barack Obama's punitive strike in response to a reported chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime.

Asked by Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), the ranking Republican on the committee, whether the secretary of state truly believed combat troops could be an option, Kerry walked the comment back by saying he was only "thinking out loud."

"Let me be very clear now, because I do not want anything coming out of the hearing that leaves any door open to any possibility," he said. "Let's shut the door now as tight as we can. All I did was raise a hypothetical question about some possibility, and I am thinking out loud on how to protect America's interests, but if you want to know if there is any -- the answer is what ever prohibition clarifies it to Congress, there will not be American boots on the ground with respect to the civil war."

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

This is probably all political.  Democrats are rubbing their dongs in hope that this ends up boosting their polling ala Gulf War.  Republicans are rubbing their dongs in hope that it blows up in the Democrats faces, allowing them to retain the House, secure the Senate, and set things up nice for 2016.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Welp...gotta look at the silver lining. At least most of the Bore is too old for the draft.

We're too old until we're not too old.

[Human Snorenado]

Time to quit trying to lose weight and get healthy

Anybody wanna run over one of my legs for good measure?

[Phoenix Dark]

Time to pretend to be gay to avoid military service.

edit: ffffuuu nm. thanks obama

[Phoenix Dark]

Business can I join your platoon. I'll follow directions, I'm a decent shot, and I have experience dealing with Arabs when I visit Dearborn, Michigan.

[Phoenix Dark]

Michigan soldiers?

[Human Snorenado]

I'm in the Oklahoma Army National Guard. I'll give you two guesses as to what kind of soldiers we don't have.

...literate ones?

[Phoenix Dark]

I think we had a couple of those during our last deployment as interstate transfers. One more guess.

can't be black. There are black people in Oklahoma, just read about a couple that committed a crime. Some have to be in the National Guard...

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

What about that one dude who supposedly knew Ashlynn Brooke?  Did he give you all any details?

[Himu]

Mary Tyler Whore

[Phoenix Dark]

can't be black. There are black people in Oklahoma, just read about a couple that committed a crime. Some have to be in the National Guard...

I suppose it's possible in the support units, but I think the infantry is too much like extreme sports to attract a lot of black people.

is this why black people are always field ops in vidya games

[Great Rumbler]

The New York Times/CBS News poll showed that though just 1 in 4 Americans believe that the United States has a responsibility to intervene in the Syrian conflict, more than 90 percent of the public is convinced that putting all 535 representatives of the United States Congress on the ground in Syria—including Senate pro tempore Patrick Leahy, House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and, in fact, all current members of the House and Senate—is the best course of action at this time.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

When asked if they believe that Sen. Rand Paul should be deployed to Syria, 100 percent of respondents said yes.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-majority-of-americans-approve-of-sending-cong,33752/

[close]

[Phoenix Dark]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With the United States threatening to attack Syria, U.S. and allied intelligence services are still trying to work out who ordered the poison gas attack on rebel-held neighborhoods near Damascus.

No direct link to President Bashar al-Assad or his inner circle has been publicly demonstrated, and some U.S. sources say intelligence experts are not sure whether the Syrian leader knew of the attack before it was launched or was only informed about it afterward.

While U.S. officials say Assad is responsible for the chemical weapons strike even if he did not directly order it, they have not been able to fully describe a chain of command for the August 21 attack in the Ghouta area east of the Syrian capital.

It is one of the biggest gaps in U.S. understanding of the incident, even as Congress debates whether to launch limited strikes on Assad's forces in retaliation.

After wrongly claiming that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 U.S. invasion, the U.S. intelligence community, along with the Obama administration, are trying to build as solid a case as they can about what it says was a sarin nerve gas attack that killed over 1,400 people.

The Syrian government, backed by Russia, blames Sunni rebels for the gas attack. Russia says Washington has not provided convincing proof that Assad's troops carried out the attack and called it a "provocation" by rebel forces hoping to encourage a military response by the United States.

Identifying Syrian commanders or leaders as those who gave an order to fire rockets into the Sunni Muslim areas could help Obama convince a war-weary American public and skeptical members of Congress to back limited strikes against Assad.

But penetrating the secretive Syrian government is tough, especially as it fights a chaotic civil war for its survival.

"Decision-making at high levels within foreign governments is always a difficult intelligence target. Typically small numbers of people are involved, operational security is high, and penetration - through either human or technical means - is hard," said Paul Pillar, a former CIA expert on the Middle East.

One possible link between the gas attack and Assad's inner circle is the Syrian government body that is responsible for producing chemical weapons, U.S. and allied security sources say.

Personnel associated with the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Council (SSRC), which has direct ties to Assad's entourage, were likely involved in preparing munitions in the days before the attack, they say.

A declassified French intelligence report describes a unit of the SSRC, known by the code name "Branch 450", which it says is in charge of filling rockets or shells with chemical munitions in general.

U.S. and European security sources say this unit was likely involved in mixing chemicals for the August 21 attack and also may have played a more extensive role in preparing for it and carrying it out.

more at http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE98603A20130907?irpc=932

[Phoenix Dark]

http://www.theguardian.com/global/middle-east-live/2013/sep/09/syria-crisis-russia-kerry-us-live

mere hours before Obama's televised speech. Putin chess move? 

[Mandark]

If the proposal is legit, this would be about the best possible outcome.  It accomplishes the goal of chemical weapons deterrence without the US actually having to fire any missiles, and maybe leaves the door slightly more open for diplomacy later on (a negotiated peace being both the USA's publicly stated goal and probably the least gruesome of all plausible outcomes for the Libyan war).

Then again, maybe it's a bad faith offer with no transparency designed to make intervention more unpopular without conceding anything from Syria's perspective.  We'll see!  Or we'll conjecture.

[Diunx]

Putin

[Brehvolution]

Putin

[Joe Molotov]

Putin

Right-wing media is stroking their dicks at how awesome Putin is.

[Phoenix Dark]

sooo isn't this entire turn of events thanks to the administration's hardline position forcing Russia to act? Not saying it's 12 dimensional chess from Obummer but still, seems like the threat was convincing.

[brob]

borderline?

[Great Rumbler]

It's hilarious because even as late as the previous Presidential election we had the Republican candidate talking about Russia/Putin being the US's biggest geopolitical foe in the world. Go back to 2008 and a GOP Veep candidate was fearmongering about the specter of Putin peeping through her bedroom window.

[Phoenix Dark]

I'm baffled by the "Putin won!" arguments on the right. Obama threatened to attack Syria...and Russia defused the situation by convincing Syria to give up their weapons (allegedly).

Don't conservatives love mentioning that time Quadaffi gave up his WMD out of fear due to the Iraq invasion? Isn't this a cheaper, less bloody version of that?


*assuming all this isn't bullshit of course

[Great Rumbler]

[Mandark]

I'm baffled by the "Putin won!" arguments on the right. Obama threatened to attack Syria...and Russia defused the situation by convincing Syria to give up their weapons (allegedly).

Don't conservatives love mentioning that time Quadaffi gave up his WMD out of fear due to the Iraq invasion? Isn't this a cheaper, less bloody version of that?


*assuming all this isn't bullshit of course

Yeah, if this pans out it would be absolutely textbook coercion/deterrence.  Literally, as in future undergrad IR* textooks would all cite it in a sidebar, because it would be stupidly simple and direct (US didn't want Syria to use chemical weapons, Syria did, US prepared to strike, Syria dumped its weapons).  It's a win for Putin as far as prestige is concerned, but it's only a loss for Obama if you presume his real goal was bombing and the chemical attack was just a pretext.  Which might just be projecting by the conservatives saying this.

The silly thing is even if this works, it would be from an offhand remark by John Kerry.  Did Syria not realize this was an option (or even if they're being disingenuous, did they not realize this would be an effective stalling ploy)?  Did the US not bother offering this since they thought there wasn't a chance?  Is there any sort of back-channel between the US and Damascus right now, or is all their communication being done through public statements?

Need new Bradley Manning so I can find out the answer in a couple years rather than decades.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

*International Relations, PD.  Get your mind out of the gutter.

[close]

[Phoenix Dark]

Even funnier when you consider the main takeaway the US media had from Kerry's speech was the mis-statement about the small nature of the attack. GAFFE GAFFE GAFFE.

 I'm sure there will be many behind-the-scenes accounts IF all goes according to plan. At the same time I'm reminded of the many times you've pointed out the bias of these types of reports in the past; we're probably going to get lots of "Obama the genius" narratives from unnamed White House staff members, and "Putin the master" accounts from unnamed Russian sources. Hopefully David Brooks will bring both sides together and tell us what really happened, and why it matters.

Finally...what exactly do conservatives want, outside of making Obama look bad. They were opposed to military action, then they were opposed to giving congress a say (of course, if Obama had simply attacked without talking to congress they'd complain about it being unconstitutional). Then while anticipating Obama's inevitable humiliation at the hands of congress, Putin sweeps in with what could be his first concession in ages. And the response is...Obama is weak? Putin is playing Obama like a fiddle? Eh? This reminds me of that video of conservative bloggers cheering the news that Chicago wasn't going to get the Olympics. Seriously?

[Mandark]

Hopefully David Brooks will bring both sides together and tell us what really happened, and why it matters.

Keep the trolling to GAF, young PD.   

There are some neocons who want more US involvement, like a no-fly zone and heavily arming certain rebel factions.  Unsurprisingly that's where McCain and Graham are.  There's the vaguely isolationist Ronrandpaul wing.  I'm sure there are mainstream conservatives who are loathe to validate anything Obama does but would like to see some bombs get dropped anyway (the equivalent of hoping a debt ceiling hike can pass with other people's votes), and then there are plenty who don't really have a strong opinion but hate Obama, so they'll just take whatever angle gains the most traction among conservatives.


For what it's worth, I think the most likely way the US fucks this up is by deciding that AQI can't be allowed to become the dominant force in Sunni Syria, and starts pouring money and weapons into the Free Syrian Army, with the expectation that Salim Idris will be able to crack down on Islamists and be a strongman for a friendly state.  I know every situation is different, but our recent track record trying that sort of thing consists of Hamid Karzai and Achmed Chalabi, so...

[Mandark]

Of course, we've been talking about this as if it's genuine, but what are the real odds here?  Assad still has plenty of incentives to keep the weapons/not be seen publicly disarming, and it's not as if he or Putin are particularly trustworthy.

Odds are this turns into a shitshow that's a microcosm of the larger shitshow.

[Phoenix Dark]

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?pagewanted=all

Obama defending US exceptionalism against a strongman daddy figure? Who will republicans side with.