Syria became a perfect political football for President Obama

[AFCman]

No, just making fun of your dumbass post...

 

 

LOL. That's more like it. THAT'S the Starkiller we all know and love.

[IsntLifeFunny]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/09/05/201268/russia-releases-100-page-report.html#.UimEgmwo7IU

 

BERLIN — Russia says a deadly March sarin attack in an Aleppo suburb was carried out by Syrian rebels, not forces loyal to President Bashar Assad, and it has delivered a 100-page report laying out its evidence to the United Nations.

A statement posted on the Russian Foreign Ministry website late Wednesday said the report included detailed scientific analysis of samples that Russian technicians collected at the site of the alleged attack, Khan al Asal in northern Syria. The attack killed 26 people.

A U.N. spokesman, Farhan Haq, confirmed that Russia delivered the report in July.

The report itself was not released. But the statement drew a pointed comparison between what it said was the scientific detail of the report and the far shorter intelligence summaries that the United States, Britain and France have released to justify their assertion that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against Damascus suburbs on Aug. 21. The longest of those summaries, by the French, ran nine pages. Each relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and they disagree with one another on some details, including the number of people who died in the attack.

The Russian statement warned the United States and its allies not to conduct a military strike against Syria until the United Nations had completed a similarly detailed scientific study into the Aug. 21 attack. It charged that what it called the current “hysteria” about a possible military strike in the West was similar to the false claims and poor intelligence that preceded the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/09/05/201268/russia-releases-100-page-report.html#storylink=cpy

100 page report versus a 9 page report from France...This is the exact thing I'm talking about.

[IsntLifeFunny]

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/09/05/alan-grayson-syria-intelligence-manipulated

 

The anti-war Democrat said there are other examples of intelligence he believes has been manipulated to favor war.

"Well yes," Grayson said, "but I'm very constrained about talking about it. ... This has become a fundamental problem with our system: The information we do get is limited, but beyond that we are very constrained in discussing it."

[RELATED: House On Track to Vote Against Syria Resolution]

Lawmakers are unable to discuss among themselves classified intelligence about Syria unless they are inside an approved reading room beneath the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center and questioning the official account of events, he said, is "actively discouraged."

The four-page White House report on the alleged attack is no more than "a briefing paper with arguments in favor of attacking Syria" that "doesn't present both sides of the issue," Grayson said.

"The administration wants to flood the zone by excluding other information or points of view," he alleged. "I think that it is interesting that the administration consistently refers to Assad doing this and Assad doing that and Assad doing the other thing without giving the public any evidence to support the proposition that Assad has done anything."

White House spokesperson Caitlin Hayden, who fields questions for the National Security Council, chose not to engage Grayson's accusation and directed questions about the veracity of intelligence to federal spy agencies.

[ALSO: Boehner Says Getting Votes on Syria Is up to Obama]

The congressman needled administration representatives for more information during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing Wednesday. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel responded that the Syrian military communications are "probably classified," but that he's unaware of any intentional deception.

The likely outcome for the vote on military action is uncertain in each chamber. Opponents of military action cite intelligence failures before the Iraq War and the fact that many Syrian rebels are al-Qaida-associated religious fanatics who also commit atrocities. A defeat in Congress would embarrass Obama, who stated his intention to strike Syria before caving to pressure and announcing he would seek congressional approval.

"We can't go to war to spare anyone embarrassment," Grayson told U.S. News. "That would be utterly immoral, we're talking about shedding American blood. ... The president has already made that argument and it's falling on deaf ears."

@reo

 

Literally exactly what I've been saying...except this is a liberal democrat saying it.

[reo]

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/09/05/alan-grayson-syria-intelligence-manipulated

 

@reo

 

Literally exactly what I've been saying...except this is a liberal democrat saying it.

 

I've understood the point. Lots of vagueness and generalities in that article though.

[Little Earl]

Uhhhh... yeah, that's the problem with Congress...

 

Problem is that Congress is full of idiots like Jim Moran who admitted that "The vast majority of my constituents are opposed."   Yet he is still going to support the Democrat president.  

[reo]

Problem is that Congress is full of idiots like Jim Moran who admitted that "The vast majority of my constituents are opposed."   Yet he is still going to support the Democrat president.  

 

This is not something you should base off support from the public. The public doesn't see the intel. They don't know what's going on (and that includes me of course). They need to base it off the case presented which we don't see either.

[ctm]

Who's up and who's down politically shouldn't even be a consideration.  The is a matter of war and peace.  Lives are at stake.

 

The President did the right thing asking for congressional authorization.  There is the war powers clause of the Constition to consider.

 

I think this will fail by a big vote in the House.

 

I'd probably vote no, but I also haven't seen the classified intelligence reports. I don't know how likely it is that the chemical weapons could get transfered to terrorists.

 

I also agree with Bink that we should go thru the UN and World Court.  The problem is that they are impotent.

[oldschool]

Who's up and who's down politically shouldn't even be a consideration. The is a matter of war and peace. Lives are at stake.

The President did the right thing asking for congressional authorization. There is the war powers clause of the Constition to consider.

I think this will fail by a big vote in the House.

I'd probably vote no, but I also haven't seen the classified intelligence reports. I don't know how likely it is that the chemical weapons could get transfered to terrorists.

I also agree with Bink that we should go thru the UN and World Court. The problem is that they are impotent.

Part of the reason for that impotency is because the U.S. does their own thing. When the world's most powerful country circumvents the U.N. how can we expect others to not do the same.

[Starkiller]

No, the problem is that we fucked up in a big way. No one trusts us because Bush invaded Iraq. People didn't blame us for breaking international law when we bombed Kosovo. They didn't blame us for invading Afghanistan. But the US lost the faith of the international community for invading a sovereign country for no credible cause and lying to them about why we were doing it.

[Titanjuicy]

we just see no reason to do anything that aids our enemies.  

Tell that to Reagan.

[headhunter]

Somebody else can take this one off our hands, i woukdnt do a single thing, the rebels are lunatics and i dont trust Syria's government, then Russia might get involved, Obama shoulda thought before he spoke.

[Starkiller]

Obama will speak on Tuesday

http://politi.co/17dfKmC

[CMJ]

To the rest of the TR Board afcman is a rodeo clown running from a bull named "Logic".

[reo]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/07/politics/us-syria-chemical-attack-videos/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein has seen the videos and wants all the members of the Senate and House to watch them.

Based on her attendance at closed-door briefings, Feinstein has decided to vote in favor of the measure to intervene militarily in Syria, defying the wishes of many of her constituents.

"What's coming in is overwhelmingly negative," Feinstein said Thursday about the feedback from voters. "There's no question about that. But you see, then they don't know what I know."

[Guest]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/07/politics/us-syria-chemical-attack-videos/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

Two things:

 

1) I wonder if we are without similar statements from previous wars, including Iraq. The question is always: "Is intervention through violence the only way we can respond?" It's a cultural failure to believe so. Regardless of whether this instance is entirely proof, it is an indisputable fact that our status as "international peacekeeper" is largely motivated by economic concerns. 

 

2) What is the disadvantage of withholding information? I understand there is occasionally a need to keep information classified, especially in such matters. But to justify military intervention on a situation such as Syria should go along with clear and cogent communication with the American people. We need to know why, and clearly, we would intervene.