Obama and the Syria conundrum

[Energon]

Russia won't be too pleased if America enters Syria. The dead Syrians and all the hoomanitarian intervention nonsense are for naive simpletons.

There are scores of Syrians getting bombed and maimed by the hour who would vehemently disagree with you. The humanitarian crisis in Syria is very much a real thing. Assad is a terrible dictator, siphoning off all wealth is one thing; bombing (and possibly gassing) the masses is a different matter altogether. However the real abettor here is Russia. In spite of the turmoil they're blatantly giving him more weapons that he can turn on the civilians; and in collusion with China they have blocked any attempts by the global community to intervene and stop Assad. So yea, if anyone deserves credit it's them.

 

[Energon]

In support of my initial argument I found a great article on FP. Turns out that the Naval analyst Chris Hammer who drew out the attack plan actually has reservations about the overall outcome of the attack. He merely devised an economical action plan using missile strikes to destroy Assad's military assets, but he didn't formulate the plan with the intention of turning it into national war policy.

Here are some poignant quotes:

Too much faith is being put into the effectiveness of surgical strikes on Assad's forces with little discussion of what wider goals such attacks are supposed to achieve. "Tactical actions in the absence of strategic objectives is usually pointless and often counterproductive,"

"I made it clear that this is a low cost option, but the broader issue is that low cost options don't do any good unless they are tied to strategic priorities and objectives," he added. "Any ship officer can launch 30 or 40 Tomahawks. It's not difficult. The difficulty is explaining to strategic planners how this advances U.S. interests."

"Punitive action is the dumbest of all actions," he said. "The Assad regime has shown an incredible capacity to endure pain and I don't think we have the stomach to deploy enough punitive action that would serve as a deterrent."

 

[pankaj nema]

All these debates going on in the Western Media and elsewhere is what
I will say is Unnecessary SOPHISTRY

USA will get absolutely NOTHING if Assad is booted out

Saudi Sunnis / Wahabis and Al Qaeda will gain the most

 

[pankaj nema]

Anybody remembers BENGHAZI

That is what USA got after Liberating Libya

 

[pankaj nema]

USA will attack Iran Tomorrow if Iran walks out of NPT

That is the Power of US Military and its commitment towards Israel

But Syria is a piece of Crap

 

[pankaj nema]

The only reason for going to war with Syria is to show the " Middle Finger "
to Russia and China especially after the SNODEN affair

Duh !!! There is No Oil in Syria

There is nothing to be gained

 

[mattster]

People who support any kind of offensive engagement in Syria are deluded.

The first point is that the Islamists groups trying to replace him are not united and there will be all out civil war after Assad is gone.

The second point is that they are much worse than Assad himself, and will massacre Christians,Shia, Alawites, pro-assad loyalists, Druze, Kurds, and any other ethnic minority.

If you think Assad is bad - then wait till you see what replaces him.

 

[Energon]

People who support any kind of offensive engagement in Syria are deluded.

The first point is that the Islamists groups trying to replace him are not united and there will be all out civil war after Assad is gone.

The second point is that they are much worse than Assad himself, and will massacre Christians,Shia, Alawites, pro-assad loyalists, Druze, Kurds, and any other ethnic minority.

If you think Assad is bad - then wait till you see what replaces him.

This is correct and goes into point #1 from the OP... There is no good outcome. You cannot possibly undertake an operation knowing well that there is no positive end point. At least with Iraq the neo con band of idiots deluded themselves into thinking there would be a positive end point (Democratic Iraq- greet us as liberators- oil will pay for everything- build lots of McDonalds- oil rich American vassal in the heart of the Middle east). In Syria's case even the fantasy option is off the table.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Mark Steyn: In Syria, U.S. looks 'not to get mocked' | war, syria, obama - Opinion - The Orange County Register

I see the Obama "reset" is going so swimmingly that the president is now threatening to go to war against a dictator who gassed his own people. Don't worry, this isn't anything like the dictator who gassed his own people that the discredited warmonger Bush spent 2002 and early 2003 staggering ever more punchily around the country, inveighing against. The 2003 dictator who gassed his own people was the leader of the Baath Party of Iraq. The 2013 dictator who gassed his own people is the leader of the Baath Party of Syria. Whole other ball of wax. The administration's ingenious plan is to lose this war in far less time than we usually take. In the unimprovable formulation of an unnamed official speaking to The Los Angeles Times, the White House is carefully calibrating a military action "just muscular enough not to get mocked."

That would make a great caption for a Vanity Fair photo shoot of Obama gamboling in the surf at Martha's Vineyard, but as a military strategy it's not exactly Alexander the Great or the Duke of Wellington...

More at link. Steyn is funny.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Best of the Web Today: Show of Farce - WSJ.com

This is good. Read it all.

 

[pmaitra]

Supporting US lead NATO's Intervene But Not the FSA

Supporting FSA is holding Snake in Packet

Please take no offense, but I gotta put it this way, and I apologize in advance.

You want to support NATO intervention, but do not support FSA. In other words, you want to jump into the water but not get wet. Or, as per this Tintin comic snippet from The Red Sea Sharks, you want to go to Mecca, but don't want to become a slave.

Do you understand that NATO intervention equals supporting FSA?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

My Way News - Experts: Don't bomb chemical weapon sites in Syria

You simply can't safely bomb a chemical weapon storehouse into oblivion, experts say. That's why they say the United States is probably targeting something other than Syria's nerve agents.

But now there is concern that bombing other sites could accidentally release dangerous chemical weapons that the U.S. military didn't know were there because they've lost track of some of the suspected nerve agents.

Bombing stockpiles of chemical weapons - purposely or accidentally - would likely kill nearby civilians in an accidental nerve agent release, create a long-lasting environmental catastrophe or both, five experts told The Associated Press. That's because under ideal conditions - and conditions wouldn't be ideal in Syria - explosives would leave at least 20 to 30 percent of the poison in lethal form.

"If you drop a conventional munition on a storage facility containing unknown chemical agents - and we don't know exactly what is where in the Syrian arsenal - some of those agents will be neutralized and some will be spread," said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, a nonprofit that focuses on all types of weaponry. "You are not going to destroy all of them."

 

[SajeevJino]

Please take no offense, but I gotta put it this way, and I apologize in advance.

You want to support NATO intervention, but do not support FSA. In other words, you want to jump into the water but not get wet.

I have an option Like This ..No Chance of wet If jumped on the Water

Or, as per this Tintin comic snippet from The Red Sea Sharks, you want to go to Mecca, but don't want to become a slave.

Cartoons ..I don't have an Idea

Do you understand that NATO intervention equals supporting FSA?

Remove the Chemical weapons that's all I want ..!! to do that I will support US/NATO any Kind of Attack over Syria

 

[The Messiah]

Remove the Chemical weapons that's all I want ..!! to do that I will support US/NATO any Kind of Attack over Syria

Why ? what will you gain by removal of chemical weapons ?

 

[SajeevJino]

Why ? what will you gain by removal of chemical weapons ?

That's a Direct threat used to kills Tons of Peoples in One Shot

Moreover

Threat to the Israeli Lives ..If they are in Assad's Hands or in FSA's Hands

 

[pmaitra]

That's a Direct threat used to kills Tons of Peoples in One Shot

Moreover

Threat to the Israeli Lives ..If they are in Assad's Hands or in FSA's Hands

Why only Syrian chemical weapons? Why not the Israeli nukes? Let's also ban missiles, and rifles. Let's take it to a ridiculous extreme. Let's ban cars and trucks too. As a matter of fact, we should also ban knives and forks. They are all a threat.

 

[SajeevJino]

Why only Syrian chemical weapons? Why not the Israeli nukes? Let's also ban missiles, and rifles. Let's take it to a ridiculous extreme. Let's ban cars and trucks too. As a matter of fact, we should also ban knives and forks. They are all a threat.

We can Believe Jews ..But No one can Believe Mullah

 

[pmaitra]

We can Believe Jews ..But No one can Believe Mullah

I am not included in that "we."

 

[W.G.Ewald]

The Rosett Report » So Much for the UN Charade in Syria…

If there's one favor Russia and China have done for us all lately, it's been to reduce the United Nations to glaring irrelevance in the Syria conflict. Due to these two, there has been no Security Council resolution proposing to deal with Syria, and it looks like there won't be. Repeated emergency meetings and draft resolutions have all arrived at a big nothing.

Why is that helpful? Because it removes the fig leaf assumption that the UN is on the job, ergo something is being done. Too often, when terrible events start to build, the UN becomes the go-to place for relays of special envoys, Security Council resolutions, and grand pronouncements by senior international civil servants. Money is spent, statements are issued, diplomatic huddles take place, crash meetings are called, and in a cloud of bureaucratic palaver, the can gets kicked down the road. Erstwhile leaders of the free world can delay any real decisions, because they have deflected the problem to the UN.

 

[The Messiah]

That's a Direct threat used to kills Tons of Peoples in One Shot

Moreover

Threat to the Israeli Lives ..If they are in Assad's Hands or in FSA's Hands

We dont indulge in thekedaari

and i do prefer wahabhis getting gassed!