Skip to comments.Inside White House, a Head-Spinning Reversal on Chemical Weapons
Posted on 09/16/2013 6:58:50 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
When President Barack Obama decided he wanted congressional approval to strike Syria, he received swiftand negativeresponses from his staff. National Security Adviser Susan Rice warned he risked undermining his powers as commander in chief. Senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer pegged the chances of Congress balking at 40%. His defense secretary also raised concerns.
Mr. Obama took the gamble anyway and set aside the impending strikes to try to build domestic and international support for such action.
He found little of either. Congress's top leaders weren't informed of the switch until just an hour or so before Mr. Obama's Rose Garden announcement and weren't asked whether lawmakers would support it. When the president's chief of staff, Denis McDonough, announced the decision on a conference call with congressional committee leaders, some were so taken aback they seemed at first to misunderstand it.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Community organizers are ill equipped to lead. Syria is Exhibit Z.
The KGB vs Chicago Community Organizers Vol. 1
This article shows what I have long suspected, that Obama is on drugs. I know from experience how erratic a person can become, from using, and Obama is showing ALL of the classic symptoms.
al Qaeda is just going to have to find someone else to fight their wars for now.
I am sure barack “warhawk” Obama will find another reason for war in the near future.
Drugs are one way that demons can manifest. That’s not the only way. There is a little squabble within hell going on right now and we can read it in current events.
Worst _resident EVER. The way he’s rolling no one will ever outdo him.
did you just misspell erotic
Full article here:
Whoops, not full, just abit more
His ignorance and lack of competence is staggering...
Just another success for the Community Warganizer.
The most interesting part of this long article is that the rats on the Titanic are spilling the beans to the hungry reporters.
On Sept. 11, Mr. Kerry spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said he believed Russia wasn't bluffing and that a deal was possible, according to American and Middle Eastern officials briefed on the exchange. Israel shared U.S. concerns that strikes could strengthen rebels linked with al Qaeda and allow them to seize Mr. Assad's weapons.
This would seem to contradict the common "to help the Israeli's"s line the pro bombing side was using.
The Israeli's as usual, kept their comments private.
Chemical weapons were their excuse for intervention. But can somebody explain why chemical weapons are worse than other weapons of mass destruction? Our firebombing of Germany and Japan caused as much mass destruction as poison gas in WWI. There’s a developing pattern — outlaw the weapons that give high-tech combatants like the USA an advantage over low-tech combatants like Islamic nations and N. Korea.
“But can somebody explain why chemical weapons are worse than other weapons of mass destruction?
I don’t know that chemical weapons are worse (less bad?) than other types of weapons of mass destruction - Chemical, biological or nuclear. Fire bombs are not weapons of mass destruction (not sure why you think they are).
“Theres a developing pattern outlaw the weapons that give high-tech combatants like the USA an advantage over low-tech combatants...”
I think you have this backwards. Chemical weapons are cheap and relatively easy to produce. they are often called the “poor man’s bomb.”
Any weapon that leaves generational collateral damage is a WMD.
You use a fuel-air bomb on a target, and it will be devastating. It won’t, however, leave fallout or residue that will effect people long after the conflict.
This is why there are efforts to eliminate the use of mines and minefields. After the war, the combatants don’t bother digging them up. Kids, and grandkids, end up getting killed.
What’s the problem? It was all Bush’s fault that Congress wouldn’t rubber stamp an authorization for an act of war right up until the time that Lurch opened his mouth without engaging his brain, giving Russia the perfect checkmate move. After that it was Obama’s brilliant exhibition of dithering statesmanship and knee jerk bluster that brought peace throughout all the lands. < sarc >
“Any weapon that leaves generational collateral damage is a WMD.”
That is a great point.
Erratic decision making....usually occurs when a person with limited knowledge or training....is left to make decisions on their own. In this case....I would doubt that anything he learned at Occidental College or Columbia...helped, or is more-or-less forgotten. The lawyer years were just waste of time. In the end, you hired up some guy who has no real experience at anything....except giving good speeches.
There was an unusual article written by the Wash Post last summer....laying out the lack of any foreign policy for four years by the Administration. Hillary was mostly there to make speeches and tour. The entire foreign policy apparatus rested in the White House....not the State Department. The only person that the article noted with any foreign policy experience? Susan Rice. That was it. The writer of the article basically hoped on the fact that 2013 would bring in a new team and finally a real international policy. In actuality? We are still on automatic, lacking a policy, and living day-to-day on the changes that the President notes....mostly from watching TV news (the place where he gets all his information).