Monday, September 2, 2013

Indications US Operation in Syria Will Be More Than the Launch of a Few Missiles

Perennial war hawks John McCain and Lindsey Graham seem  to be happy with the attack plan being developed by the White House. This suggests that the ultimate goal is regime change, which is likely to mean chaos not different from Egypt and Iraq. Christians will be vulnerable.

USA Today reports:

 President Obama's bid to get congressional support to use military force in Syria received a boost Monday as Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham said they have more confidence the White House is developing a better strategy for dealing with Syria.

McCain and Graham are key votes Obama will need to win Senate approval for the United States to launch missile strikes againstSyria in response to an Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack that killed more than 1,400 people.

Obama said Saturday he had concluded the United States should launch an attack in response to the attack, but he said he wants approval first from Congress.

McCain and Graham have jointly expressed concerns that a military strike should be part of a broader strategy in Syria, not simply a random attack to punish the regime.

After meeting with Obama Monday, they both said they believed the White House is developing a strategy that would weaken the regime of President Bashar Assad and boost Syrian opposition forces - though they said Obama has more work to do to explain this plan.

"We still have significant concerns," McCain said, "but we believe there is in formulation a strategy to upgrade the capabilities of the Free Syrian Army and to degrade the capabilities of Bashar Assad. Before this meeting, we had not had that indication."


  1. A few observations on the latest Obama debacle regarding Syria:

    - The promised retaliation is purely a face-saving act for Obama's stupid red line comment. When presidents make public proclamations, they should be prepared to follow through or look silly when they don't.

    - The administration claims the goal of retaliation is to send Assad a message and that regime change is not in plan, when it should be obvious to anyone that regime change is the ONLY goal.

    - Obama claims to care for the welfare of the Syrian people who were affected by the chemical attack. This is the same man that has killed thousands of innocent people, including American teen-agers, with his drone program. Obama is a sociopath. He doesn't care one iota about others.

    - There doesn't appear to be any long-range thinking going on at the White House. They can't seem to look beyond the immediate attempt to oust Assad from power. Do any of these geniuses ask themselves:

    - What if Syria retaliates against US allies or installations in the region?

    - What if Hezbollah fires off rockets from Lebanon into Israel? Do they honestly think Israel is going to sit back and take it?

    - What if another large-scale terrorist incident is carried out on American soil as a result of our intervention?

    - What happens if Russia actively sides with Syria? Are we willing to risk a nuclear confrontation over that patch of sand?

    - How can we afford yet another war when the nation is already technically insolvent, the economy is on its knees, and we're spending a trillion dollars we don't have every year as it is?

    I guess none of this matters. Certainly no one in this administration is going to answer these questions. All that matters is that Obama looks tough for the nut job neocons and Likud Party hacks.

    We've got 3.5 more years of this incompetent boob? God help us.

  2. Graham, McCain and Obama in the same room. Anymore in the room and the would have exceeded the Fire Marshal's max capacity for sociopaths.

  3. Very true. Obama isn't going through all this media blitz for a couple of cruise missiles. And that's assuming he had nothing to do with the likely false flag attack.

    The 'limited strike' thing is designed to:

    1) Fool the US public into thinking this is just another cakewalk and no need to worry, and

    2) Convince the Syrians and their allies that 'this wont hurt a bit' and no need to retaliate.

    The first group might be fooled (though it's getting harder)

    The second almost certainly know better.

    There are a number of Russian ships in the area. And while I'm quite sure they wont fire at American ships, some knowledgeable bloggers suggest they have powerful radars SIGINT and can data link with the Syrians to provide them with real time battle intel and guidance for their SAMs, even after their own radars are wiped out.

    Don't know if that's true.

    1. That is interesting. What happens if Syria fires back? I wonder if any American has even consider the possibility.

    2. Perhaps the US will sink one of it's own, Tonkin style, and then they can completely remove the velvet glove covering the iron fist.

  4. I watched the Intervention Brothers on CSPAN. Their goal is a greater war with Syria, Iran, Hezbollah (Lebanon) and Hamas (Gaza). The problem is Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and the West Bank, all hardly stable societies.

    McCain and Graham think they can tackle Syria without the Middle East going up in flames. That may be true in the short run, but heavy handed U.S. intervention will blow back. I expect McCain and Graham to accept no responsibility when that happens.

  5. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.