Skip to comments.On Syria, Obama says no rush toward costly interventions
Posted on 08/24/2013 6:27:05 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
President Barack Obama called the apparent gassing of hundreds of Syrian civilians a "big event of grave concern" but stressed on Friday he was in no rush to embroil Americans in a costly new war... Obama brushed over an interviewer's reminder that he once called chemical weapons a "red line" that could trigger U.S. action.
A White House spokesman reiterated Obama's position that he did not expect to have "boots on the ground" in Syria.
Obama's caution contrasted with calls for action from NATO allies, including France, Britain and Turkey, where leaders saw little doubt Assad's forces had staged pre-dawn missile strikes that rebels say killed between 500 and well over 1,000 people...
According to U.S. and European security sources, U.S. and allied intelligence agencies have made a preliminary assessment that Syrian government forces did use chemical weapons in the attack this week and that the act likely had high-level approval from President Bashar al-Assad's government.
Obama played down the chances of Assad cooperating with the U.N. experts who might provide conclusive evidence of what happened, if given access soon...
Asked about his comment - made a year and a day before the toxic fumes hit sleeping residents of rebel-held Damascus suburbs - that chemical weapons would be a 'red line' for the United States, he replied: "If the U.S. goes in and attacks another country without a U.N. mandate and without clear evidence that can be presented, then there are questions in terms of whether international law supports it."
Russia and China have vetoed United Nations Security Council moves against Assad in the past and oppose military action.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
An activist wearing a gas mask is seen in Zamalka area, where activists say chemical weapons have been used by forces loyal to President Bashar Al-Assad in the eastern suburbs of Damascus August 22, 2013. REUTERS/Bassam Khabieh
President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I
have more flexibility.
President Medvedev: I understand.
It sounds like Great Leader frowned upon the event. There’s nothing more meaningful and decisive than a good frowning upon.
This is clever politics. Stance is that he’s reluctant to get “pushed” into an intervention. The gas attack means the decision for US intervention has already been made. The attack would not have happened otherwise.
Who is pushing him? Whoever arranged the gas attacks.
I’m almost certain it was not Assad. “Let’s see, how do I get the Americans to come in and destroy me? I know, I’ll gas some rebels.”
It could have been the Russians or Iranians—if they are ready to take us down in the middle east, this is how to get Obama to jump for the tar baby.
Most likely the rebels, aiming for a quick fix of cruise missiles and F-15’s.
For what may be the first time ever, I agree with Obama on this one.
Different reasons, but I agree we should go slow. Real slow because we have no business there. Syria is a real lose lose situation.
No rush...means not this month.
But come September where all in.
Just like “The Rev.” frowning upon 3 blacks killing a white Aussie.
Reports have ships, troops headed to the Middle East. Look for an intervention while Great Leader says he doesn’t know anything.
Who should know better? Jackson "frowned upon" the Oklahoma Australian's murder.
Difficult decision to make. Will he support the dictator that supports terrorism or the terrorists directly. Your lose/lose situation is very correct.
Was there UN resolution for the Revolutionary War?, the War of 1812? the War with Mexico?, WWI, WWII, the Korean War?
I thought he was blaming Limbaugh for no action on Syria.
Guess obammy has no family getting killed here or maybe he’d do anything
No rush...means the most radical muslim side is already winning.
But if the more moderate side gets the upper hand, we’ll sweep in to rescue the losers.
Obama can’t see red lines. His whole worls is black and white.
For what may be the first time ever, I agree with Obama on this one.
Next comes a sternly worded letter.
World: Watch out!
U.S. naval forces are moving closer to Syria as President Barack Obama considers military options for responding to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Assad government. ......
The president emphasized that a quick intervention in the Syrian civil war was problematic, given the international considerations that should precede a military strike.
We're already the bad guys of the planet, so .. frick it ... nuke 'em.
Yes on the Korean war... A war which has never had a peace accord, a war that continues to this day with US troops serving on the front line.
Pretty convincing evidence why the UN should never be used as a mechanism for war.
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Before we go off half-cocked, can anyone actually say which set of Worthy Oriental Gentlemen fired poison gas at another set of Worthy Oriental Gentlemen?
Of course, as always our support of the "rebel" Worthy Oriental Gentlemen will mean the torture and death of thousands of Christians ... an Obama tradition dating back at least to 2006 when he and The Dick Morris stumped Kenya for Raila Odinga, a Communist Jihadist whose followers massacred Christians after he failed to win the election.
Your reasoning is spot on but you're looking in the wrong direction for the instigator. Look to Samantha Power whose whole diplomatic career has been built on advocating 'humanitarian' military intervention. She shares the bolshevik ethics of hubby Cass Sunstein that would make the victims expendable for the greater good. I find it also suspicious that she just happens to absent herself from her job when this goes down.
No need to take action yet. But wait until Obama is convinced that the Muslim Brotherhood is actually going to lose the battle with Assad.
I personally don’t expect Obama to give up his support for the MB. Egypt is the first real test but Syria is not far behind. For me this is the real story. How far will Obama go to support the Caliphate.
That “Red Line” turned pink...
Now, dumBO worries about cost.
Last week on the panel of Fox Special Report, they all agreed that the polls show an unwillingness to get involved. How much of that was due to dumBO leading. I would not follow Odungo anywhere.
Assad is Saddam with a college education. However, the opposition to him in Syria is even more complicated than Saddam’s was in Iraq. There are no good options in Syria. Innocents will continue to be slaughtered in any case.
The Korean war actually did have a un mandate.
The Russians had walked out of the debate and lost their veto.
Last time that ever happened
the Korean War?
Yep. That was the first time the United States was suckered by that bunch. Truman fell for the UN crap hook line and sinker and and managed to kill 54,000 Americans. And to show there were no hard feelings, every damn administration since has allowed the UN to f*** us over. Only Reagan tried to slow them up a little. Not hard enough, but at least he tried.
The radicals are already in Syria, in the form of the thousands of Iranian thugs and Hizbollah — they fight on Assad’s side.
Yeah, it interferes with his ability to implement Zerocare and then raise taxes — tax increases are only feasible if he can claim that he’s worried about the deficit.
He’s not interested in much of anything beyond the limits of his epidermis.
Of course it was Assad, or whichever of his “allies” (occupying power is Iran and its proxy Hizbollah) has access to the chemicals.
Zero’s been handling the Syrian civil war (now into its third year) very well, and the Russians are all-in, meaning they either have to pull out and abandon Assad before he’s done, or they have to extricate themselves after he dies, or, he has to prevail.
Meanwhile Zero has put some missile batteries and support troops in Jordan, and shipped food, tents, and medical supplies to refugees, while selling a trickle of weapons to the various Gulf states who smuggle them to the many rebel splinter groups.
The best part of a muzzie civil war is, everyone wins.
Well, he does worry all the time about the fed deficit. /s
Well, half-black and half-white anyway.
That’ll be for the Iranians — assuming Zero’s no longer in office, that is.
The demographics of the fight in Syria are these: Syria has five populations — 1) the Alawite Muslims (Assad's tribe), 2) Shi'ite Muslims, 3) Druze Muslims, and 4) Christians — these are the 26 percent ruling minority. The 5th population -- the 74 percent ruled over majority --- are Sunni Muslims. The New Syrian Army soldiers are Sunnis that are attempting Assad's overthrow. These fighters are supported by Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and many of the Gulf states. Obama is a Sunni tool and will do the heavy lifting for his Saudi masters.
Besides the 26 percent minority fighting to keep Assad in power — rightfully fearing a Sunni led genocide if they win — Assad is getting aid from Iran, Russia, and China. This is what makes any U.S. or European involvement in the Syrian civil war very risky. Bottom line: Syria is NOT a fight we want to pick because there is no national security risk here. There are no “good guys” in this fight. All there are — bad guys and worse guys.
US intervention to save Syria’s and Lebanon’s Christian population is something that might be worth supporting, but meanwhile the muzzies are whittling each other down. It’s been up and down throughout that failed state, which has been a cut into a bunch of fiefs for two years.
My guess is, it’s about to get a whole lot worse from the standpoint of muzzie-on-muzzie killing. This has nothing to do with the phony story in Le Figaro about CIA, Israeli, and Jordanian commandos in Syria. The Iranians have as many as 19,000 troops in Syria, plus some thousands of basically expendible Hizzies pulled from Lebanon. This is a substantial force; Syria’s prewar population was something like 20+ million, with age 18 universal 5-year conscription for men having been difficult to enforce for a decade or more (expatriate workforce, 17 yr and 11 mo Syrians go on “vacation” to places in the Gulf for example for ready employment) and between breakdown of order and young people either heading for the exits or joining one of the militias, the entire Syrian army is probably well under the theoretical figure, which is close to a quarter of the population.
If Syria had 5 million in its armed forces, there would never have been much of an uprising in the first place. A strength of 50,000 wouldn’t be surprising, but if much more than that were left it seems unlikely that Iran would have made such a difference with its commitments.
Iranian forces have been doing a lot of fill-behind guard duty and “policing”, and their proxies the Hizzies have been pushed into the heavy action. That in turn suggests that motivation and morale is mostly pretty low in whatever’s left of the Syrian army.