Are We Poised for a War in Syria?

[Cheshire Cat]

Another view from a Washington Post/ABC poll.  Six out of ten Americans do not want congress to approve strikes on Syria.  An interesting side note, on Wednesday, Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) tweeted that his office had received 753 calls opposing military intervention in Syria and just 10 in favor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-may-want-americans-to-support-strikes-on-syria-but-can-he-do-anything-about-it/2013/09/08/b30b216e-1896-11e3-8685-5021e0c41964_story.html 

And that is definitely not the case for Obama at the moment. A Washington Post-ABC News poll last week showed that nearly six in 10 Americans — including a majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents — oppose U.S.-led military strikes against Syria, even after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons against his own people. Anecdotal evidence suggests similar opposition among the general public. On Wednesday, Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) tweeted that his office had received 753 calls opposing military intervention in Syria and just 10 in favor.

[If_I_Loved_you]

Another view from a Washington Post/ABC poll.  Six out of ten Americans do not want congress to approve strikes on Syria.  An interesting side note, on Wednesday, Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) tweeted that his office had received 753 calls opposing military intervention in Syria and just 10 in favor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-may-want-americans-to-support-strikes-on-syria-but-can-he-do-anything-about-it/2013/09/08/b30b216e-1896-11e3-8685-5021e0c41964_story.html 

And that is definitely not the case for Obama at the moment. A Washington Post-ABC News poll last week showed that nearly six in 10 Americans — including a majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents — oppose U.S.-led military strikes against Syria, even after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons against his own people. Anecdotal evidence suggests similar opposition among the general public. On Wednesday, Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) tweeted that his office had received 753 calls opposing military intervention in Syria and just 10 in favor.

Hey I called the White House and told Obama whatever he needed to do he had my blessing. 

[Cheshire Cat]

Meanwhile German reporting says Assad did not order the use of chemical weapons.  From the Guardian News.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/08/syria-chemical-weapons-not-assad-bild

Assad did not order Syria chemical weapons attack, says German press
President Bashar al-Assad did not personally order last month's chemical weapons attack near Damascus that has triggered calls for US military intervention, and blocked numerous requests from his military commanders to use chemical weapons against regime opponents in recent months, a German newspaper has reported , citing unidentified, high-level national security sources.

The intelligence findings were based on phone calls intercepted by a German surveillance ship operated by the BND, the German intelligence service, and deployed off the Syrian coast, Bild am Sonntag said. The intercepted communications suggested Assad, who is accused of war crimes by the west, including foreign secretary William Hague, was not himself involved in last month's attack or in other instances when government forces have allegedly used chemical weapons

[Ajax]

If President Obama doesn't strike Syria because the House & Senate members vote it down. Anymore Chemical Weapon, Bombing or shooting deaths by the Syria Army I will blame those House & Senate members for these deaths!!!

The Obama Administration is on record saying the US can strike Syria with or without Congressional approval.  So why won't you blame Obama for not acting regardless of what Congress says?  While you're at it, go ahead and blame every other government on earth for not acting. 

If the military follows Obama's plan there will most certainly be more shooting and bombing deaths of civilians.  Didn't Obama say they're going to do a limited strike just to get rid of the chemical weapons?  It doesn't sound like Obama or anyone else is particularly worried about the shootings and bombings - just the chemical weapons. 

Who are you holding accountable for the hundreds of innocent children who have been killed by US drone strikes?

Look no one wants Innocence people to die. But the Drones that have killed a lot of Al Quadia leaders has been good for the world. So while I'm holding no one accountable. I am sorry that Innocence people have been killed.

If Congress votes against military intervention, you're holding them accountable for people dying in a civil war in Syria.  But you're holding "no one" accountable for US drones killing kids in Pakistan?  Ok, I see...

There should be a pretty long list of people who are accountable.  G.W. Bush, Obama, Congress...you and me - for not telling our representatives to stop bombing people in our names.  We could add a lot more, but I can't agree with "no one" being accountable. 

Is it fair to say you're ok with children dying over there as long as it's by US hands and not some evil dictator's hand? Because that's what it sounds like. 

[Ajax]

Who are you holding accountable for the hundreds of innocent children who have been killed by US drone strikes? 

You may have to provide something to back up the size of this claim.

In Pakistan alone, Wikipedia reports between 168-197 children killed by drone strikes.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan 

Here's a CNN article: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world/asia/pakistan-us-drone-strikes

This is a recent strike in Afghanistan - we're still killing kids there.  I haven't been able to get numbers on children killed in Yemen and Afghanistan.  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/world/asia/two-deadly-attacks-in-afghanistan.html?_r=0

I'm not familiar with this organization, so take it with a grain of salt.  If they're correct, then the number of children killed in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia exceeds 200.  http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/12/03/november-2012-update-us-covert-actions-in-pakistan-yemen-and-somalia/

I found this, another one that I'll suggest you take with a grain of salt only because I don't know much about their organization, but it lists names of children who have been killed.  http://www.policymic.com/articles/24164/a-list-of-children-killed-by-drone-strikes-in-pakistan-and-yemen

http://www.policymic.com/articles/20884/is-america-like-adam-lanza-u-s-drone-strikes-have-killed-176-children-in-pakistan-alone

My lunch break is over, but I think it's fair to say US drone strikes have inadvertently killed hundreds of innocent children.  Maybe I should have said "scores" or "dozens" but I really don't think that makes it any better. 

OK I would say you have more than justified the original post.  More importantly wow war and intentional policing sucks.  We should stay out of those businesses as much as we can.

I agree. 

[Cheshire Cat]

Congressman Ander Crenshaw has announced that he is against any U.S. action in Syria.  Nothing yet from Corrine Brown.

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/matt-dixon/2013-09-09/ander-crenshaw-against-syria-strikes

When asked last week, Crenshaw's office said he was continuing "to review information at all levels."

Here's his statement sent Monday evening:

    Congressman Ander Crenshaw, a member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, today (9/9) announced that he will vote against authorizing the use of United States military force in Syria.

    He issued the following statement:

    "I have carefully reviewed data from our government's highest levels, analyzed facts from our top military leaders, and listened to my constituents, who overwhelmingly oppose action in Syria.  I have decided that military intervention is not in the best interest of America and will vote against authorizing the use of military force in Syria."

[civil42806]

Hopefully he turns all the chemical weapons (which he said he doesn't have) over to the UN.  Then he can get back to shooting and blowing up his opponents, which is cool with us and the international community (whatever that may be).

Quite frankly I agree stay out of it as long as it stays in Syria. 

[If_I_Loved_you]

If President Obama doesn't strike Syria because the House & Senate members vote it down. Anymore Chemical Weapon, Bombing or shooting deaths by the Syria Army I will blame those House & Senate members for these deaths!!!

The Obama Administration is on record saying the US can strike Syria with or without Congressional approval.  So why won't you blame Obama for not acting regardless of what Congress says?  While you're at it, go ahead and blame every other government on earth for not acting. 

If the military follows Obama's plan there will most certainly be more shooting and bombing deaths of civilians.  Didn't Obama say they're going to do a limited strike just to get rid of the chemical weapons?  It doesn't sound like Obama or anyone else is particularly worried about the shootings and bombings - just the chemical weapons. 

Who are you holding accountable for the hundreds of innocent children who have been killed by US drone strikes?

Look no one wants Innocence people to die. But the Drones that have killed a lot of Al Quadia leaders has been good for the world. So while I'm holding no one accountable. I am sorry that Innocence people have been killed.

If Congress votes against military intervention, you're holding them accountable for people dying in a civil war in Syria.  But you're holding "no one" accountable for US drones killing kids in Pakistan?  Ok, I see...

There should be a pretty long list of people who are accountable.  G.W. Bush, Obama, Congress...you and me - for not telling our representatives to stop bombing people in our names.  We could add a lot more, but I can't agree with "no one" being accountable. 

Is it fair to say you're ok with children dying over there as long as it's by US hands and not some evil dictator's hand? Because that's what it sounds like.

Ajax would you prefer the people we go after with Drones to carry out their evil against American's and anyone they want? I said  "Look no one wants Innocence people to die. But the Drones that have killed a lot of Al Quadia leaders has been good for the world. So while I'm holding no one accountable. I am sorry that Innocence people have been killed." When it came to my statement of holding House & Senate Members accountable for the deaths in Syria I was pissed! I should have said "If President Obama doesn't strike Syria because the House & Senate members vote it down. Anymore Chemical Weapon's used Bombing or shooting deaths by the Syria Army I will blame those House & Senate members for these deaths!!!" Because I feel like President Obama was right to bomb Assad using Chemical Weapons!

[If_I_Loved_you]

Congressman Ander Crenshaw has announced that he is against any U.S. action in Syria.  Nothing yet from Corrine Brown.

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/matt-dixon/2013-09-09/ander-crenshaw-against-syria-strikes

When asked last week, Crenshaw's office said he was continuing "to review information at all levels."

Here's his statement sent Monday evening:

    Congressman Ander Crenshaw, a member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, today (9/9) announced that he will vote against authorizing the use of United States military force in Syria.

    He issued the following statement:

    "I have carefully reviewed data from our government's highest levels, analyzed facts from our top military leaders, and listened to my constituents, who overwhelmingly oppose action in Syria.  I have decided that military intervention is not in the best interest of America and will vote against authorizing the use of military force in Syria."

No real surprise here. But don't forget people Mr. Crenshaw is still Pro Military so it's not like he has changed his mind and is antiwar minded overall.

[BridgeTroll]

Interesting perpective... read the last sentence if nothing else...

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/syrian-christians-fear-us-attack-and-islamist-opposition-a-921162.html

Looming US Attack: Syria's Christians Caught in the Crossfire

By Raniah Salloum in Harissa

They fled from the bitter conflict because they fear the rebels yet can expect no assistance from Assad. Now many of Syria's Christians are stranded in Lebanon, and are answering the call of the Pope by praying for their country -- and that the US military intervention does not come.

They have followed the Pope's call to pray for Syria. But some do not seem entirely convinced. "Look, there aren't even any special security precautions, I don't believe it!" says the young Lebanese woman, as she climbs the stairs to the cathedral in Harissa. The hilltop village lies about 30 kilometers north of Beirut and hosts a famous pilgrimage site, Our Lady of Lebanon. It is considered one of the country's landmarks. The 13-ton white statute is visible from miles around.

Security personnel checking pockets and bags are indeed conspicuous in their absence, these days in Lebanon, where people live in the shadow of the big neighbor Syria. Bombings are also becoming more frequent in Lebanon. So far, the attacks have been targeted at Sunnis and Shiites, but Christians are particularly nervous. They're concerned at the increasingly Islamist tone of the rebels in Syria. They think their way of life will be in danger sooner or later.

In the parking lot in front of the cathedral are four friends, Tony, Jenny, George and Mark. They do not want to give their surnames. They are a bit uneasy talking to Western journalists. The three men are wearing neatly ironed shirts, Jenny a short summer dress. They have come with their families to answer the Pope's call. "We want to pray for Syria. Apart from that, we cannot do anything," says George.

The four are Syrian Christians and know each other from Aleppo, where they were neighbors. Some 14 months ago, when the Syrian civil war reached their town, they each packed a large suitcase and took the next flight to Beirut. Two or three months later, the next big wave of their former neighbors arrived from Aleppo, Jenny says. All of them Christians. "Anyone who could, left," she says.

A Threat to Their Good Old Life

Most Christians, in Lebanon as in Syria, oppose the Syrian rebels. Tony, Jenny, George and Mark resolutely support President Bashar Assad. Before the uprising the four friends were part of Aleppo's upper class. For them, the rebels are barbarians threatening the way they live. It is a perspective that they share with upper class Sunnis.

Many Christians find themselves once again caught in the middle. In Lebanon, not all of them are completely supportive of the Syrian regime. Too many of them had bad experiences with the Assad clan during the Syrian occupation of Lebanon from 1976 to 2005. But the rebels are not an alternative for them. They look upon the potential US military intervention with mixed feelings. Tony, George, Mark and Jenny completely oppose it.

"The world must prevent America from bombarding the Syrian army," says George. "These are our soldiers. They fight for us against the terrorists."

Jenny has found a job in Lebanon as head of a school for Syrian refugees. George, Mark and Tony live on their savings. All three were pharmaceutical drug manufacturers. Before the war, Aleppo was known for its pharma industry. "Our house is still untouched," says George, "but my warehouses were looted." "We have all lost our businesses," says Tony.

"When was Lebanon Ever Stable?"

The four Syrians do not feel completely at home in Lebanon. None of them have Lebanese friends; they hang out with each other. Many Lebanese people resent the millions of Syrians who have come to the small country to flee the war, says George.

Tony fears more violence. "When was Lebanon ever stable?" he asks. "We just want a place where our children can grow up in safety," says Jenny.

If the four could, they would gladly move to the West with their families. But they do not have the necessary visas. The immigration policies of some European countries, among them Germany, give preference to Christians over other Syrians when it comes to asylum, but they are skeptical.

"This is an attempt by the Europeans to drive a wedge between us and our government," says Jenny. "They want to turn us Christians against Bashar Assad, but we will not. Bashar protects us."

Speaking the Language of Jesus

"We have heard what happened at Maalula," says George. He firmly believes the terrible stories that are being told about the ancient Christian city. A few days ago, rebels briefly advanced into the center of Maalula. The city, along with some adjacent Sunni villages, is one of the few places where Aramaic, the language of Jesus, is still spoken.

Maalula provides an example of how Christians are being exploited in the Syrian civil war. Shortly after the rebels marched in, the Syrian state broadcaster reported that they desecrated the churches and destroyed shrines.

But then a senior nun at the Thekla Convent in Maalula contradicted the reports and said the rebels had not damaged the shrines. A Christian resident told the Reuters news agency: "We must remain fair. They do not seem to have looted churches or houses." In video footage showing the city and rebels after the occupation, no damage to the churches can be seen.

For several days now, the Syrian army has been deployed in Maalula with tanks and artillery. Damascus will pin the blame for the resulting damage on the rebels and they in turn will blame the regime.

Both sides in the Syrian civil war know how important the Christians' situation is in influencing the mood in the West. Therefore, the regime regularly devises horror scenarios of desecrated churches and massacred Christians -- while the Syrian opposition draws up lists of the churches damaged by shelling from Assad's military and accuses the regime of kidnapping bishops. Amid the turmoil of war and the polarized atmosphere, who is responsible for what is a question of political faith.

[JeffreyS]

Good find BT.

[civil42806]

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?

1.  That doesn't make sense to me.  But I guess if Assad is a madman it wouldn't have to make sense to anyone. 
2.  I don't know who to believe.  I believe that Obama and Kerry and the rest of the US government have demonstrated a willingness to lie to push an agenda.  I know that Putin is a liar.  And I don't doubt that Assad and the al Qaeda militants are liars.  So I don't know who to believe in this scenario.
3.  Yes, the UN has its own agenda.  So does the US - it's usually about money.  Even the Pope said that military strikes would be futile and there are other ways to handle this.  But he's got his own agenda too.

Have you followed the Assad Family over the years? His father was a butcher and they run their country like a dictatorship. A lot like Russia and Putin? I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall and listen to Putin and Obama today behind closed doors? But your right the U.S. has their own agenda. And I like this Pope but I'm not Catholic I'm a Methodist. So I don't follow the same teaching as the Catholics are taught. 

assad a butcher and so is his son?, no your wrong, our greatest secretary of state and future president said hes a reformer.  Dear aunt Pelosi and uncle biden loved to visit him. and have there picture taken.  But then again "what does it matter now"

[Cheshire Cat]

First Lady Michelle Obama opposes military action in Syria, President Barack Obama told PBS and NBC News on Monday.

"My own family members... they're very wary and suspicious," President Obama told PBS.

Obama said the First Lady does not want the country to engage in another war:

[Ajax]

First Lady Michelle Obama opposes military action in Syria, President Barack Obama told PBS and NBC News on Monday.

"My own family members... they're very wary and suspicious," President Obama told PBS.

Obama said the First Lady does not want the country to engage in another war:

In that case, I would like to ask Mrs. Obama to read Lysistrata! Lol

[BridgeTroll]

First Lady Michelle Obama opposes military action in Syria, President Barack Obama told PBS and NBC News on Monday.

"My own family members... they're very wary and suspicious," President Obama told PBS.

Obama said the First Lady does not want the country to engage in another war:

He is losing credibility with his own family?