Monthly Archives: August 2013

Libyan official on Saudi Prince Bandar delivering Israeli chemicals to Syrian terrorists

"A high-level anonymous official with the Libyan Ministry of Defense granted an interview to the Voice of Russia and discussed matters of intelligence surrounding the chemical attack in Syria. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, when asked if he could verify admissions by Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan that he controlled the terrorists groups in Syria, including Chechen terrorist formations, stated that this was true. The official then stated that there were rumors in the Libyan Defense Ministry that it was actually Bandar who delivered the chemical weapons from Israel to the Syrian insurgents and that it was Israel who was pushing the United States for a military attack on Syria." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingLibyan official on Saudi Prince Bandar delivering Israeli chemicals to Syrian terrorists

Obama’s Latest Arguments Do Not Hold Water

"Obama declares that the U.S. membership in the UN and solemn agreement to its Charter is irrelevant. He does not intend to abide by the agreement and thus international law. What messages does this declaration send? Obama is saying he’ll break or adhere to a compact on a selective basis as he pleases. Next week, he might support a UN action and the following week not. In this same speech, Obama says 'We cannot raise our children in a world where we will not follow through on the things we say, the accords we sign,…' He doesn’t seem to realize that his statement about going it alone regardless of the U.N. smashes that accord that the U.S. signed." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingObama’s Latest Arguments Do Not Hold Water

White House sends resolution to Congress asking for approval on Syria strikes

"The White House formally asked Congress Saturday for authorization to conduct military strikes in Syria in a draft resolution framing a narrow set of operations, in a bid to ease fears of another open-ended war. The document says support from Congress, requested by President Barack Obama in a stunning development on Saturday, would 'send a clear signal of American resolve.' 'The objective of the United States use of military force in connection with this authorization should be to deter, disrupt, prevent and degrade the potential for future uses of chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction,' the draft resolution reads." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingWhite House sends resolution to Congress asking for approval on Syria strikes

Syria and the Albright Syndrome

"Much like the person with a hammer, to whom everything looks like a nail—we continue to believe that every problem can be solved by the military. Sadly—regardless of the administration’s overall political views—we continue to suffer from Madeleine Albright syndrome. As Secretary of State, Albright challenged then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell’s view that the United States should restrict its military interventions to situations in which vital U.S. interests were threatened, quipping: 'What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?'" Continue reading →

Continue ReadingSyria and the Albright Syndrome

Is the U.S. the World’s Moral Authority as Obama Thinks?

"A U.S. bombing of Syria is an aggression because it cannot be justified by claiming defense or national interests. The U.S. cannot claim that it is acting for the world or the world’s good, surely not when it is being warned outright by other nations that the results may well be catastrophic. The U.S. cannot claim it is enforcing a treaty because Syria has not agreed to a chemical weapons treaty. Furthermore, the existing agreement among states did not include a provision that declares non-signers as outlaws and then authorizes the U.S. to be the policeman. The U.S. is acting unilaterally and outside the bounds of international law." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingIs the U.S. the World’s Moral Authority as Obama Thinks?

Can Obama Control Syrian Outcomes?

"Obama is speaking of a 'limited, narrow act'. The fact is, however, that he has no control over the short-term and long-term responses of the Syrians, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Russians, Israel, and the Iranians. He has no control over current and future terrorists. He may imagine that he is executing a tit for tat or a surgical strike, but the other players need not accept that way of looking at a cruise missile attack. In all probability, their memories and histories suggest that they are not going to consider this attack an isolated event. They will surely connect it to the entire history of U.S. actions in the past, especially those of the past 10 years. I have to wonder who is advising the President at this juncture." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingCan Obama Control Syrian Outcomes?

I Am Curious About Why Vital Information Was Not Publicized

"The government’s intelligence statement says that they had information three days before the gas event. I am curious. Did Obama privately warn the Syrian government not to make a gas attack? Did he reveal to them that he had intelligence of their activities so as to stop them? Why didn’t Obama make this intelligence fully public prior to the attack? Wouldn’t that publicity have made it very difficult for an attack to have been ordered? Even if the intelligence was not 100% able to nail down an impending attack, why was it not made public? How can we be sure that this intelligence is meaningful if, prior to the event, the U.S. government didn’t consider it reliable enough so as to issue a warning?" Continue reading →

Continue ReadingI Am Curious About Why Vital Information Was Not Publicized

The U.S. Will Regret Intervention in Syria

"One argument for U.S. intervention in Syria is as a message to Iran to take seriously U.S. threats toward its nuclear program—on which Obama has also painted himself into a corner by saying he will not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. Yet military options to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons or a nuclear capability have never been very credible—bombing likely will not get all of Iran’s nuclear facilities and will likely only spur Iran to accelerate the program to deter further attacks. In fact, limited U.S. intervention in Syria may not only fail to intimidate Iran, but act as a similar nuclear accelerant." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingThe U.S. Will Regret Intervention in Syria

UK Parliament votes against war for the first time since American Revolution end

"Prime Minister David Cameron's plans to join a potential military strike on Syria were thwarted on Thursday night when Britain's parliament narrowly voted against a government motion to authorize such action in principle. In a humiliating defeat for the British leader likely to damage Cameron's hopes of being re-elected in 2015 and set back traditionally strong U.S.-UK relations, parliament defied Cameron by 285 to 272 votes. Commentators said it was the first time a British prime minister had lost a vote on war since 1782, when parliament effectively conceded American independence by voting against further fighting to crush the colony's rebellion." Continue reading →

Continue ReadingUK Parliament votes against war for the first time since American Revolution end