« Drinking More Koolaid - Where is the proof in Syria? | Main | The smoking gun comes from .... »

26 August 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Maureen Lang

From WaPo:

"A new Reuters/Ipsos poll has finally found something that Americans like even less than Congress: the possibility of U.S. military intervention in Syria. Only nine percent of respondents said that the Obama administration should intervene militarily in Syria; a RealClearPolitics poll average finds Congress has a 15 percent approval rating, making the country’s most hated political body almost twice as popular..."

How long before we of the 91% are labeled unpatriotic for not joining in the war dance high kicking chorus line? My moral compass spins at the thought...


The decorated Swift-windsurfer Kerry must have some special intellegence from Borat. Obviously the NSA under Clapper and Alexander are too busy spying on Americans (and their own lovers) to spy on the FSA or Assad:



The evidence points to the Rebels...

"According to sources, the Russian delegation presented the documents during a UNSC meeting Friday. During the meeting, the Americans did not file any documents that contradict the Russian documents, given that the US satellites have come to similar conclusions: the opposition had fired the chemical rockets.

This comes as the Syrian representative to the United Nations Bashar Jaafari returned quickly from Damascus to New York on to provide the evidences that support the Russian stance.

Meanwhile, informed sources clarified that the Westerns refrained from accusing the Syrian regime to only ask for an expand to investigations , due to the images the Russians delivered.

The images showed that the rockets were launched from Duma at 1:35 on Wednesday.

It was noting that the Western countries did not resort to their references’ terms, but rather to the statements of the Syrian Opposition Coalition to accuse the Syrian regime.

Based on the Russian information, the two rockets were manufactured domestically to carry chemicals. They were launched from an area controlled by “Liwaa al-Islam”, led by Zahran Alwosh."



Depressing. I hated the last movie (George and Dick's Excellent Misadventure), and am really not in the mood for a crappy "direct to DVD" sequel. Though I guess this time around is really part 3 or 4, depending on how you count things (Kosovo probably counts just about as well as Iraq did).

But at least the government is doing its job of keeping me libertarian.


A. Pols

They had "evidence" at the radio station in Gliewitz back in 1939....


For the sake of widening this discussion, let me pose this question:

In the event that there were incontrovertible evidence that it was the Assad regime that launched a large-scale chemical attack against civilians, what do we we think should or should not be done by the United states?

Steve Pelletiere

Steve Pelletiere


Can anyone confirm / disprove that the US wants the inspectors out of Syria?

"The U.N. weapons inspectors arrived at the site after the U.S. delivered a caution to Mr. Ban, telling him it was no longer safe for the inspectors to remain in Syria and that their mission was pointless, said a person familiar with the matter. Mr. Ban "stood firm on principle," ordering his team to continue their work establishing whether chemical weapons or toxins were responsible for the estimated hundreds of deaths of Syrian civilians."

UK also seems to think inspections are pointless:

""We have to be realistic now about what the U.N. team can achieve," Foreign Secretary William Hague told reporters.

"The fact is that much of the evidence could have been destroyed by that artillery bombardment. Other evidence could have degraded over the last few days and other evidence could have been tampered with," "

If evidence degrades so very fast, what was the purpose of sending in inspectors for alleged attacks that happened months ago?

John Minnerath

My moral compass still spins on good bearings, but it always ends up pointing in a different direction than Kerry and company.



If only 9% of Americans are for war with Syria, then what, besides Presidential pique, could be the driving force to get rid of the Assad regime?

1) Israel. Since the Likud takeover, the only chance of survival of a expansionist Jewish State is to play one ethnic group in the Levant against another; i.e. Sunni verses Shiite.

2) Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. They have to keep their own Shiites cowered.

3) Trans-National Elite. They will take down anyone who is not bowing to their wealth, power, and ideology.

All the rest of the players, here and abroad, are hand maidens at service to those listed above.


The Brits are getting all set...

Witnesses living near the RAF base at Akrotiri (meaning The Cape), a few kilometers from the city of Limassol, said they saw three large planes landing there late on Monday. Two of the planes were AWACS, or Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft and the third one a tanker for mid-air refueling.

The state broadcaster said similar activity had been observed prior to past military action involving the British base, the most recent being the use of the base by Tornados enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya the fall of 2011.




Extremely well put. I think there are only three things that 91% of Americans agree on. We think ice water should come with every restaurant meal; ice cream is the best possible dessert; and we shouldn't attack Syria. Let me know if I'm leaving anything out.


John Kerry...the man who called Vietnam a mistake, but whose only take away was that getting the country to make mistakes is great politics.


Maureen, that train left the station even longer ago when the politicos cared about voter sentiment. And why should they with 95% probability of being re-elected no matter what they do while in office. Unless of course they were flashing their weiner or caught with their office mate in flagrante delicto. The tribals can always be counted on to rally to their chief on the ticket. You know the lesser evil!


We're going to destroy the evidence with our own bombing campaign. In my opinion, the press conference today was a formality, they've already made the decision to attack. Wouldn't be surprised if they do something by the weekend.


watching Hass, on PBS....I could have kicked the TV in....what supreme arrogance, with a mix of well informed 'cluelessness'.

Paul Warfield

Couldn't agree more, PL. Also, what about the stunning irony that on the very same day CIA documents were revealed (in Foreign Policy, link below) that prove that the U.S. supported Saddam's use of chemical weapons against Iran?

Hypocrisy doesn't get any more grotesque.


SAC Brat

I'd like to see Martin Dempsey (Is this good for America?) prevail. He seems to be the best man for the moment. Would you expect him to resign in protest if plans to attack move forward? Is there any leverage the administration can apply to him to keep him from embarrassing them?

What a circus. Would it be simpler to just support Christians in the Middle East?

The beaver

Is this a coincidence or is it a CYA instance just in case, in the future, other 'collateral damage" subjects don't come after the Nobel Peace prize winner :(

"In court papers filed today (PDF), the United States Department of Justice requested that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz be granted procedural immunity in a case alleging that they planned and waged the Iraq War in violation of international law.


I did call RI Senator Reed about the Syrian issue. Fortunately, he is one of the few Senators who actually has military experience and so is probably better able to evaluate the costs of intervention than most of those in the Administration. Naturally, I only spoke to junior staffer. But Reed is pretty good about replying to constituents about their concerns. Nonetheless, all I probably accomplished is making myself feel a little better.


Examine their moral compasses what rot!!!! (I'm going to nice) Is it just me or are we about to have our Guns of August moment? We have a bunch of people in the western political leadership who seem just a inept and short sighted as Kaiser Bill, Nick the Second, Uncle Franz, and the many others who tumbled into the abyss in 1914.
When you boil this down this is a Sunni Shia proxy war with SA wanting the US and the west to do it's dirty work. I can't see Iran sitting quietly by while the Sunni's take Syria. They louse Syria then the next round of bloodletting is Iraq, they louse Iraq they're surrounded. The only wild card is Russia, but I don't see Russia going to the wall for Syria.
Iran can't challenge the US directly but they can indirectly, that's how we can fall into the abyss of 2013.

joe brand

I thought Kerry's comments were a nothingburger. He said that he knows Syria used chemical weapons because of YouTube, but then said that the U.S. government is going to really really think about this a whole lot and have a lot of discussions.

I had the sense, especially since the thing started almost an hour after its announced start time, of a group of people scrambling to find some ad hoc noises they could make with their mouths that would relieve them of acting on the president's "red line" warning. I am tough! Grr! (Please don't hit me.)

If they do end up at war, it will be because of the president's extraordinary ability to get rolled by other, stronger people, not because the administration wants to fight.


Blue or Red, a Dragon is still a dragon - apologies to GRRM

A dragon is a tool to attack the White Walkers on command...


More Haas buffoonery...

Richard Haas, president of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations think tank, rejected the idea - suggested by Russia - that a Western attack on Syria would need U.N. approval.

"The U.N. Security Council is not the sole or unique custodian about what is legal and what is legitimate, and, as many have pointed out, it was bypassed at the time of Kosovo," he told reporters in a conference call.

"To say only the U.N. Security Council can make something legitimate seems to me to be a position that cannot be supported because it would allow in this case a country like Russia to be the arbiter of international law and, more broadly, international relations," Haas said.

Legitimacy for a strike on Syria, Haas said, could come from a "coalition of the willing" of individual countries that support retaliation against Assad to demonstrate that the use of weapons of mass destruction will not be tolerated


ess emm

I appreciate your efforts to expose and ridicule this stupid and senseless imperial adventure.

The demands of empire run counter to the principles of democracy. Obama and his crew are choosing empire.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad