Are We Poised for a War in Syria?

[Cheshire Cat]

Right wing, left wing, who cares?  The reality is that the involvement of Al Qaeda has been alleged in this instance by more sources and media outlets than the one above.  It is of paramount importance for the U.S.A. to make sure this element has not infected the rebel cause and that we are not helping to fund their efforts.  Embedding their ilk into efforts that they are not directly involved in in order to grow their influence is an ongoing "MO" of Al Qaeda.  Shall we just hope the allegations are untrue or shall we investigate them?  They delivered one of the single most damaging blows on American soil we have ever seen.  Let's not pretend that they are incapable of doing damage on the ground in Syria.  That would be terribly arrogant of us and frankly stupid.  This must be investigated and understood to be true or false and it needs to be investigated now, on the front end of more talks or potential action.

Diane who should do the investigation in which most people will believe? It is out of are hands it's up to the Congress God help us. And the President of The United States of America!

Is this a serious question?  If we have resources that are being used and relied upon to determine whether or not Syrian leadership used chemical weapons do you think that those self same resources cannot be used to determine the involvement of Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah?  You seem to think the U.S. have enough facts in had to bomb in Syria, but you still ask how do we go about getting facts on the ground about the who and what of this civil war.  SMDH!

I believe Syria did use Chemical Weapons. But you keep beginning up these so called facts from the washington times and others SMDH!

It's called reading comprehension and you clearly need to work on that. lol  At no point did I present this information as "facts" however sharing current media views is part and parcel of understanding this issue and what underlies it. What I did say was the question of potential (and I believe likely) involvement of Al Qaeda needs to be looked into prior to further discussion and action in response to what is happening in Syria.  Pay attention please if you feel the need to comment.  I put my real face and name to my comments and stand behind what I say while doing my best to explain my concerns and opinions.  You stand in the wings sharing opinions and views remaining in the shadows of an online moniker.  Please forgive me for not being able to take your ongoing posts and dialog seriously in this case.  I truly don't mean that as insulting and I am sure others will defend commentary under a screen name as necessary for privacy and I get and respect that in most cases, not all.  Your's falls into the "not all" category. 

[Cheshire Cat]

Not sure I buy this...

I think it takes greater strength for a President to change course in view of the desires of the citizens of our country and the world.

I personally think he is hiding behind it.  He has given himself an "out".  "I know I said red line... but congress says no so..."  It will be interesting to see how the congress leans and how Obama responds... then how Assad and Iran and France and Israel and etc responds.

There is no law beyond "ego" that says rethinking a course of action is a weakness when in fact it may be the truest measure of strength depending upon the ramifications of military action on humanity.

Have no doubt... rethinking his red line threat absolutely WILL be percieved as weakness by opponents, friends and the non committed around the world.

I am sure a lot of people agree with you BT.  I am still serious about the ability to change course, not just in the case of a President, but as it would apply to any individual who is poised to make a serious decision that will impact other people.

I would contend in this case that a "change in course" implies indecision.  This indecision will be viewed as weakness and vacillation.  From where you and I stand we would likely see this as a miscalculation by those who see it that way.  Miscalculation by Assad or Iran or Russia or Israel... may be an even worse outcome of this mess than we think...

I won't argue that view.  You may be correct.

[If_I_Loved_you]

"Miscalculation by Assad or Iran or Russia or Israel... may be an even worse outcome of this mess than we think..."  Wait until Iran finishes their Nuclear Weapon program and Israel will take care of them and it's not going to be pretty.

[BridgeTroll]

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a450a866-1467-11e3-84b4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2dvJA3oR9

Number of refugees fleeing Syria tops 2m

By Abigail Fielding-Smith in Beirut and Funja Guler in Ankara and John Aglionby in London

Syria's refugee crisis is escalating, with the number of people having fled its borders doubling to 2m in the past six months, the UN has warned.

The UNHCR, the body's refugee agency, said on Tuesday that the refugee total a year ago stood at 230,670. Today's 2m total includes all those registered as refugees and awaiting registration.

"The war is now well into its third year and Syria is haemorrhaging women, children and men who cross borders often with little more than the clothes on their backs," the agency said in a statement.

[Ajax]

Right wing, left wing, who cares?  The reality is that the involvement of Al Qaeda has been alleged in this instance by more sources and media outlets than the one above.  It is of paramount importance for the U.S.A. to make sure this element has not infected the rebel cause and that we are not helping to fund their efforts.  Embedding their ilk into efforts that they are not directly involved in in order to grow their influence is an ongoing "MO" of Al Qaeda.  Shall we just hope the allegations are untrue or shall we investigate them?  They delivered one of the single most damaging blows on American soil we have ever seen.  Let's not pretend that they are incapable of doing damage on the ground in Syria.  That would be terribly arrogant of us and frankly stupid.  This must be investigated and understood to be true or false and it needs to be investigated now, on the front end of more talks or potential action.

Diane who should do the investigation in which most people will believe? It is out of are hands it's up to the Congress God help us. And the President of The United States of America!

There's an International Criminal Court in the Hague that is set up for this type of situation. 

[Ajax]

It is true Diane... and there is worse... Hezbollah and Hamas (Iranian proxies) have allied themselves with Assad.  It is already possible/probable that Assad has or is ready to arm these two groups with chemical weapons.  A side effect of an Obama missle attack is the threat to Israel...

Let the Baathists and al qaida gas and butcher each other... let Hamas and Hezbollah bomb and butcher al qaida...

There really cannot be too many women and children left in Syria as most are now in refugee camps in surrounding countries... or dead.

I fear it is true and I fear that the U.S. is the "big Gorilla" that is being pocked by pointed sticks on all sides.  We simply must know what we are dealing with and admit that we cannot change what is happening in the middle east.  They must work it out themselves and that will likely take more time than most of us have left on this earth, if history is the indicator.

It is the ultimate.... no win situation.  Since Obama boxed himself in with his "red line" threat... not responding to Assads use of chemical weapons will be a sign of weakness... not just to Assad but to Iran also.  Iran is watching closely as they are slowly bringing their nuclear capability on line.  The US has long had a policy of no nukes in Iran... so they are watching to see how we respond to... obamas red line.

If Assad jr. wins the "civil war" the US will be blamed for not helping overthrow a regime worse than gaddafi and hussein combined.  If the islamist rebels overthrow Assad... we will again be on the wrong side as... well they are islamists (al qaida etc).

Fun stuff this real world politik...

I agree that Obama boxed himself in, but as a person who doesn't want the US to be the 'world police' anymore, I'm not too worried about looking weak.  Nobody on earth doubts that the US would respond to an attack on our soil or interests, so the 'looking weak' problem is more of a problem for our allies than it is for us.  And we have too many alliances as it is. 

[Ajax]

Not sure I buy this...

I think it takes greater strength for a President to change course in view of the desires of the citizens of our country and the world.

I personally think he is hiding behind it.  He has given himself an "out".  "I know I said red line... but congress says no so..."  It will be interesting to see how the congress leans and how Obama responds... then how Assad and Iran and France and Israel and etc responds.

There is no law beyond "ego" that says rethinking a course of action is a weakness when in fact it may be the truest measure of strength depending upon the ramifications of military action on humanity.

Have no doubt... rethinking his red line threat absolutely WILL be percieved as weakness by opponents, friends and the non committed around the world.

I started out thinking that Obama had given himself an out, but now I'm not so sure.  Kerry (among others) has been spouting off that Obama is doing the right thing and taking it before Congress, but that Obama has the power to order a strike.  So if Congress votes 'no', then the Obama administration is already on record saying that they still have the necessary power.  He can't have it both ways. 

Regardless, I think that Congress will narrowly approve.  Boehner, Cantor, McCain, Graham and the rest of the old guard have come out strongly in favor.  And we know that if there's one thing that Republicans like more than obstructing Obama, it's bombing the crap out of people. 

[Ajax]

Right wing, left wing, who cares?  The reality is that the involvement of Al Qaeda has been alleged in this instance by more sources and media outlets than the one above.  It is of paramount importance for the U.S.A. to make sure this element has not infected the rebel cause and that we are not helping to fund their efforts.  Embedding their ilk into efforts that they are not directly involved in in order to grow their influence is an ongoing "MO" of Al Qaeda.  Shall we just hope the allegations are untrue or shall we investigate them?  They delivered one of the single most damaging blows on American soil we have ever seen.  Let's not pretend that they are incapable of doing damage on the ground in Syria.  That would be terribly arrogant of us and frankly stupid.  This must be investigated and understood to be true or false and it needs to be investigated now, on the front end of more talks or potential action.

Diane who should do the investigation in which most people will believe? It is out of are hands it's up to the Congress God help us. And the President of The United States of America!

Is this a serious question?  If we have resources that are being used and relied upon to determine whether or not Syrian leadership used chemical weapons do you think that those self same resources cannot be used to determine the involvement of Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah?  You seem to think the U.S. have enough facts in had to bomb in Syria, but you still ask how do we go about getting facts on the ground about the who and what of this civil war.  SMDH!

I believe Syria did use Chemical Weapons. But you keep beginning up these so called facts from the washington times and others SMDH!

Did you ever ask yourself why Assad would use chemical weapons?  I mean, it seems like the world was going to allow him to kill as many people as he wanted as long as he stuck to bombs and bullets.  Why would he ruin it? 

Can you imagine a scenario where al Quaeda militants - from another country and who have no particular allegiance to Syria or Syrians - might be willing to lob some chemical weapons into a residential area in order to get the rest of the world to come in and help them overthrow Assad?  I may not be completely up-to-date but last I heard the UN wasn't able to definitively say who launched the chemical attack. 

[If_I_Loved_you]

Right wing, left wing, who cares?  The reality is that the involvement of Al Qaeda has been alleged in this instance by more sources and media outlets than the one above.  It is of paramount importance for the U.S.A. to make sure this element has not infected the rebel cause and that we are not helping to fund their efforts.  Embedding their ilk into efforts that they are not directly involved in in order to grow their influence is an ongoing "MO" of Al Qaeda.  Shall we just hope the allegations are untrue or shall we investigate them?  They delivered one of the single most damaging blows on American soil we have ever seen.  Let's not pretend that they are incapable of doing damage on the ground in Syria.  That would be terribly arrogant of us and frankly stupid.  This must be investigated and understood to be true or false and it needs to be investigated now, on the front end of more talks or potential action.

Diane who should do the investigation in which most people will believe? It is out of are hands it's up to the Congress God help us. And the President of The United States of America!

Is this a serious question?  If we have resources that are being used and relied upon to determine whether or not Syrian leadership used chemical weapons do you think that those self same resources cannot be used to determine the involvement of Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah?  You seem to think the U.S. have enough facts in had to bomb in Syria, but you still ask how do we go about getting facts on the ground about the who and what of this civil war.  SMDH!

I believe Syria did use Chemical Weapons. But you keep beginning up these so called facts from the washington times and others SMDH!

Did you ever ask yourself why Assad would use chemical weapons?  I mean, it seems like the world was going to allow him to kill as many people as he wanted as long as he stuck to bombs and bullets.  Why would he ruin it? 

Can you imagine a scenario where al Quaeda militants - from another country and who have no particular allegiance to Syria or Syrians - might be willing to lob some chemical weapons into a residential area in order to get the rest of the world to come in and help them overthrow Assad?  I may not be completely up-to-date but last I heard the UN wasn't able to definitively say who launched the chemical attack.

1. Did you ever ask yourself why Assad would use chemical weapons? Yes he knows the Civil War isn't going away anytime soon. He used the Chemical Weapons feeling he has Big Brother Iran and Russia on his side that the Americans are not going to bomb his country? 2. Can you imagine a scenario where al Quaeda militants. I hope you don't believe these none humans over President Obama? 3. UN wasn't able to definitively say who launched the chemical attack. The UN has it's own agenda they want everybody to hold hands and sing? We are the World?

[I-10east]

Although I don't like Obama's decision to attack Syria, I do like his decision to force Congress to approve that military action. IMO the whole 'security threat to the USA' in Syria is unfounded and bogus. The Arab League already said that they don't want any Western interference with this thing; Our course we will be portrayed as the 'infidel invaders' although they kinda will have a point....

[Cheshire Cat]

Now that this issue will be discussed by Congress and a decision rendered, it is important that we the people speak to our representatives in Congress and let them know how we feel about the issue of "missile strikes" in Syria.  Please take a brief moment to call both of our rep's in Congress and let them know you opinion.  They are keeping a running list of yea's and nay's.  You don't have to leave a name or number just your opinion.

Jacksonville Congress Rep's

              Rep.  Corrine Brown            (904) 354-1652
              Rep.  Ander Crenshaw         (904) 598-0481

[Cheshire Cat]

Looks like this young man has read a page from my book.  Could not have said it better.  Below find the link to the video with Chris Hayes comments.  I agree, I agree.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/04/chris-hayes-on-syria-here-is-where-i-stand/  (click link for full video or written transcript)

And before I explain my reasoning let me say that I don't think that people who disagree with me are contemptible scoundrels and warmongers. My own father, an ex-jesuit community organizer and a true moral beacon in my life thinks we should intervene and that counts for a lot in my book.

That said, here's why I think a military strike like the one being proposed is a bad idea.

First of all there's always a likelihood that we kill innocent people, a risk you run with any kind of military engagement, particularly aerial bombardment.

Second, while I think the general idea of enforcing the international norm against the deployment of chemical weapons is a laudable goal, I'm skeptical this kind of strike will do that. If Assad did in fact use chemical weapons—and you'll excuse me if the experience of Iraq makes me a wee bit reluctant to definitively state he did based solely on US intelligence. But again, if Assad, as the evidence would seem to suggest, did use these weapons, then he likely did so as a way of basically burning the bridge that could have let him retreat

[Cheshire Cat]

Just how ugly can all of this get and where are we headed if we move to strike Syria?  Here is an indicator.  Russia how now moved it's missile cruiser to the Mediterranean.   Anyone one think Russia's leadership will back off their support of Syria?  Is it worth finding out?

Moscow has been Assad's most powerful ally, protecting him from consecutive U.N. security resolutions aimed at pressuring him to end violence. Russia insists the conflict must be solved through political dialogue in which Assad must take part.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/russian-missile-cruiser-mediterranean_n_3864741.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

[acme54321]

Do they revoke Nobel Peace prizes for inciting WWIII?

[Cheshire Cat]

Do they revoke Nobel Peace prizes for inciting WWIII?

They damn well should.