September 01, 2013

Media Reviews of Obama's Syrian Performance Not So Great
— Ace

Amateur hour.

Ah that's too bad. But then, a president once said of politics, if you want a friend, get a dog.

Obama's got two of them. And I don't mean Bo and Sunny.

Apparently John Kerry had a tough time explaining his boss' weakness and fecklessness with Chris Wallace.

Last night I saw David Axelrod tweeting that with Obama punting to Congress, Congress is now "the dog that caught the car." In other words, he was claiming a hearty pro-Obama spin, similar to but a little different than BuzzFeedBen's and BuzzFeedChuckTodd's. Axelrod's suggestion is that Congress was chasing down this car (the Syria issue), not having any idea what to do with it, and has now caught it, and aren't they in trouble now.

Well, ultimately, they can just do what dogs do when they catch a car: Nothing. Which is what Congress should do about many invitations to authorize war.

Though I do enjoy Axelrod's suggestion that all decisions about going to war are just so much jockeying, spin, and politics. Revealing.

Update: Even David Sirota gets it. Bam!

Update: A commenter put this bee in my bonnet. He didn't say this, but he talked about something reasonably close to it and suggested this:

When Obama was planning to strike Syria without Congressional authorization, word went out from his conspirators that there would probably be no presidential address on that matter. That Obama would not be on TV. They claimed this decision was made because TV is "old technology" and they would rely on the "new technology," apparently consisting of cutting-edge press releases, to note the US was now engaged in war without a vote in Congress.

Obviously this decision was made because the strike would be unpopular and Obama didn't want to strongly associate himself with it.

But notice that yesterday, when he announced the more popular decision to punt to Congress, suddenly the "old technology" of the Televised Address was totally relevant again.

Unpopular Decision: TV is old technology. Obama will just Like his unilateral war on FaceBook.

More Popular Decision: Straight to a national televised address.

Interesting, no?

Posted by: Ace at 08:43 AM | Comments (442)
Post contains 371 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Maybe Assad will die laughing.

Posted by: zsasz at September 01, 2013 08:44 AM (MMC8r)

2 Axelrod's take illustrates why, no matter how disillusioned I get with Republicans, I cannot vote Democrat at the national level. They're all about trying to look sound on national security, rather than actually being sound on national security. I can think of honorable exceptions, but for the most part it's all about the politics. So to Axelrod, who apparently can't think outside his box, this whole goat-rope is a victory for the president if he can make Congress the bad guy.

Posted by: JPS at September 01, 2013 08:46 AM (9ziuC)

3 We are calling it Operation Pencil Dick at my home.

Posted by: NCKate at September 01, 2013 08:46 AM (KKfVH)

4 Why did Ace link to me? Because I'm a star. BAM!

Posted by: David Sirota at September 01, 2013 08:47 AM (z9HTb)

5 Obama is saying he doesn't care if Congress won't OK Ann attack. That's obvious bluster, but it is true he is tougher on the Congress than he is on foreign enemies. So, who knows...

Posted by: MTF at September 01, 2013 08:48 AM (qf2kI)

6 Ace working on a Sunday...lol

Posted by: The Dude at September 01, 2013 08:48 AM (vJdyz)

7

I loved the way that Kerry tried to imply that Prezident Putz was doing Congress some sort of FAVOR by magnanimously allowing them to share in his glorious achievement.

 

And suggesting that if Congress tells him "No" that not only are they feckless, un-American traitors, but that he will just go over their heads and do what he wants anyway.

 

How DARE the rest of the world laugh at him and call him incompetent?  He'll show them - just wait and see!

 

They'll be sorry.....

Posted by: Tereas in Fort Worth, TX at September 01, 2013 08:48 AM (PZ6/M)

8 Read the Euro newspaper web sites; they think Obama is Less Than Okay


much less.  Flummoxed, they are:  Their boyfriend stepped on his tiny dick, and they think he's some combination of a fool and a fraud.


The stakes are high, and confidence is low.

Posted by: Keyser Soze at September 01, 2013 08:49 AM (omBWL)

9 Since this whole exercise is to keep O! from looking bad, any personnel who fall will have died for less than nothing.

Posted by: The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth at September 01, 2013 08:51 AM (Hsgnv)

10 http://tinyurl.com/kbpxz5p Did Rand Paul get to deliver this zinger directly to Lurch?

Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 08:51 AM (z9HTb)

11 Last night I saw David Axelrod tweeting that with Obama punting to Congress, Congress is now "the dog that caught the car." ************ Just how mature is that? It's weird that--after Obama went for a walk with McDonough and conferred with some of his younger staff--(and non-security experts)--he gained sudden clarity because they had finally strategized against their real enemy-- Congress Republicans. (Plus this maneuver gave him a less stressful vacation unburdened by full responsibility.)

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 08:51 AM (r2PLg)

12 White House war-fags are already saying Off the Record that Obama will attack regardless of what Congress does.  These a**holes never sleep


never

Posted by: Keyser Soze at September 01, 2013 08:51 AM (omBWL)

13 Affirmative Action has Consequences.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 08:52 AM (Jgpr1)

14 Obama, Kerry, and the guys can't solve any problem that can't be solved with a good lie.

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 08:52 AM (VlXYw)

15 This whole thing has just shown how lazy Obama is when it comes to his actual job. "I say it, you should do it! Don't expect me to actually do anything that looks like working on it...creating coalitions, soothing concerns, or anything like that."

The only interest in work he has shown while in office, as long as you don't count trying to correct a slice, is illegally punishing his enemies.

Posted by: keninnorcal at September 01, 2013 08:53 AM (ng9uL)

16 Kerry dining with "thug and murderer" friend Bashar Asaad, president of Syria

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c72e153ef019aff2045f3970d-popup

Posted by: Walter at September 01, 2013 08:53 AM (0PGVB)

17 Well, at least the Lord of the Rings is on AMC.  No NFL today?

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectual at September 01, 2013 08:53 AM (Cydud)

18 trying to keep the president from invading countries on a whim is only driving the moderates from the GOP to the democrats. 

Posted by: joeindc44 at September 01, 2013 08:54 AM (13QKP)

19 6 Ace working on a Sunday...lol

Posted by: The Dude at September 01, 2013 01:48 PM (vJdyz)


Better now than on the ONT.  ha ha.

Posted by: Billy Bob, pseudo intellectual at September 01, 2013 08:54 AM (Cydud)

20 And in this case I heartily approve of congress doing nothing.   In fact, that is the optimal solution for all their shit.  Do nothing, unless it is to un-do shit they have done before.

Posted by: Vic at September 01, 2013 08:54 AM (zZbNF)

21 So you're saying we're on David Sirota's side of an issue.


Sigh.


Off to recalibrate the webcam to get the ick of that off of me.

Posted by: alexthechick - Team SMOD at September 01, 2013 08:55 AM (Gk3SS)

22 So there's an official WH photo of Obama with his foot on the Resolute desk while he's on the phone. It's making the rounds on Twitter. I wonder if somebody has collected photos with Obama's feet on desks. In particular, the resolute desk. He does that a lot. I'm sure it's on purpose, he's a petty little passive-aggressive twerp who is going to act out his tantrum towards the UK.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 01, 2013 08:55 AM (xSegX)

23 1 Maybe Assad will die laughing.

Posted by: zsasz at September 01, 2013 01:44 PM (MMC8r)


I never need to stop and wonder why I love this place so much!!


Here in the land of the tiny-brained, they are already marching in the streets to oppose the very idea of doing a damned thing in Syria.  These are barky's people doing this, one of them speaking for ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism).  So, there's that!

Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 08:55 AM (8lmkt)

24 Am I crazy to think that if the House votes for war (even if most the Yes vote is from Dems), then Obama will purposefully screw it up, blame it on those war-mongering Republicans, and then submit to "international opinion" and let them tell us what we can and can not do?

Posted by: The Political Hat at September 01, 2013 08:55 AM (Vk2pI)

25 McCain and Graham are already calling for more aggressive actions.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 08:55 AM (Jgpr1)

26 I feel for the president having to make this decision; well, I guess now it's in the hands of the goofballs in Congress. However, I don't see how bombing is going to do anything but show the other tyrants in the ME that we bomb your ass if you do this. It won't stop Assad from gassing more and it won't stop the islamist rebels from beating their wives or killing 'infidels.'

Maybe it will make Tehran take notice, I don't know.

Whatever happens, we know that the MSM will put a happy face on it if OBumble is involved. As opposed to its treatment of GWB, when all decisions out of the Whitehouse were bad ones and a 5.8 unemployment rate meant economic disaster.

Posted by: Sphynx at September 01, 2013 08:56 AM (cll/q)

27 "...they can just do what dogs do when they catch a car: Nothing."

Hammer this home!

The House should be the voice of the people, and the people are being very clear about Syria: Stay The Fuck Out!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 08:56 AM (gqgiP)

28 Nobody is asking the Right Questions, as usual: Is Syria A Direct And Imminent Threat To The United States? and... Who Are These 'Rebels,' Anyway?

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 08:56 AM (kJMDJ)

29 Let me be clear:  Assad's use of Saddam's chemical weapons of mass destruction on Syrian civilians is an insult to me personally, which makes it a National emergency, and I must act to punish him now by bombing Syrian civilians.  Rapid response is critical!!! Therefore, I'm going to ask congress if they're ok with that -- but I won't call 'em back early for an emergency session because, Golf.  So if congress takes their bloody time debating the matter, and then tells me 'no' they won't support my military adventure in Syria just now, I'm gonna go it alone anyway right away.  And I mean it this time!   Eventually.

Posted by: The Almighty Bronco Bama at September 01, 2013 08:56 AM (1I4sj)

30 I loved the way that Kerry tried to imply that Prezident Putz was doing Congress some sort of FAVOR by magnanimously allowing them to share in his glorious achievement. Anyone else get the feeling Kerry's playing his own game here?

Posted by: Randy McSeamammal, Dolphin Lothario at September 01, 2013 08:57 AM (m9V0o)

31 This just needs more tailoring. Someone call Harry Pendel.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 01, 2013 08:57 AM (XW66B)

32 12 White House war-fags are already saying Off the Record that Obama will attack regardless of what Congress does. These a**holes never sleep never Posted by: Keyser Soze at September 01, 2013 01:51 PM (omBWL) ************* That actually makes sense if you dive into the labyrinth of their strategy. Say they are actually negotiating with a three year old on how to discipline him so that Mom will be satisfied. Obama Administration: Listen Assad I have to spank you because I promised to! Assad: Ya but you can't spank me for too long!! Obama: Well we won't do it for too long--it won't really hurt. Assad: How can I believe you!? Obama Administration: Okay we will do this AUMF thing--where I promise--if I spank you for longer than 60 days it will hurt me more than it hurts you....deal?

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 08:57 AM (r2PLg)

33
The decision is made, and it's time for hoops.

Posted by: The Community Organizer at September 01, 2013 08:57 AM (pJF+c)

34 Off, seamammal sock!

Posted by: Brother Cavil and his Flying Toaster Circus at September 01, 2013 08:58 AM (m9V0o)

35 McCain and Graham are already calling for more aggressive actions.


The only aggressive action those two need is a vigorous dorking in the squeakhole.  So sick of these two clowns.

Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 08:58 AM (8lmkt)

36
what if President Obama were to privately consult with George Bush? This is something I've fantasized about. I imagine Obama talking about how much he understands now what Bush went through and how Bush is the one person in the world who understands what he's going through. I picture Bush supporting the younger man in a completely empathetic and patriotic way.

Posted by Ann Althouse




Ann now writing Obama/W slash fiction. "And they're both dressed like gladiators!"

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at September 01, 2013 08:59 AM (kdS6q)

37 I find it darkly humorous that The Great Speechifying Teleprompter Reader painted himself into red line corner by running his mouth.

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 08:59 AM (VlXYw)

38 Can I git me a license to raze villages in a fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan here?

Posted by: John F. Kerry at September 01, 2013 08:59 AM (Q9qpj)

39

The decision is made, and it's time for hoops.

 

 

I'll be right over!

Posted by: Reggie 'The Glove' Love at September 01, 2013 08:59 AM (Jgpr1)

40 CharlieBrown'sDildo, 1:56: "The House should be the voice of the people, and the people are being very clear about Syria: Stay The Fuck Out!" Yeah, I was listening to ABCNews on my car radio yesterday, and I about drove off the road when the guy said there's no consensus here at home about military action in Syria. Right now I'd say there's about as much a consensus as we ever have. We are against.

Posted by: JPS at September 01, 2013 09:00 AM (9ziuC)

41 ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism).

Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 01:55 PM (8lmkt)

You made that up.

Wait....Southern California?

Never mind.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:00 AM (gqgiP)

42 Are we gonna bomb somebody Spike, huh, huh?  That'll really show 'em, won't it Spike?

Posted by: Senators Queeg and Goober, wagging their tales at September 01, 2013 09:00 AM (Q9qpj)

43 38 Can I git me a license to raze villages in a fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan here?
Posted by: John F. Kerry at September 01, 2013 01:59 PM (Q9qpj



Now that's funny right there; I don't care who you are.

Posted by: Sphynx at September 01, 2013 09:01 AM (cll/q)

44 >>Is Syria A Direct And Imminent Threat To The United States? and... >>Who Are These 'Rebels,' Anyway? There's another question that needs to be answered. Where is the proof that the Sarin gas was used by Assad instead of the terrorists masked as freedom fighters? It's simply not true that Syrian rebels, which in the case of many are really al Qaeda, don't have access to Sarin. And the first UN inspector flat out said it was the rebels who launched the gas attack. What the hell are we doing contemplating going to war in support of al Qaeda?

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:01 AM (g1DWB)

45 Is Obama planning Syria as if it was an Aaron Sorkin script?

‘Life imitating art?’ John Kerry’s sarin talk reminds Twitter users of HBO’s The Newsroom

http://tinyurl.com/n44y9q5

All these reports about sarin gas make me think @HBO Newsroom was ahead of the curve @Jeff_Daniels @JohnGallagherJr @oliviamunn—
Sidney Stein (@SidneyStein) September 01, 2013

Reading Kerry's statement on Syria, I can't help but think of the Newsroom and Op. Genoa–except that's fiction, and Syria is very real.—
Karina Ana Peña (@karina_pena90) August 30, 2013

Has Aaron Sorkin been sitting in on these meetings? #Newsroom “@nbcnightlynews: Kerry: Samples from #Syria tested positive for Sarin.”—
Michelle Martin (@ShoeGal1105) September 01, 2013


Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 09:01 AM (/9IC1)

46 Here's how it will go down: As soon as the bombing missions commence, a new distraction will pop up to avert The Dumb People's eyes away from another of Obama's misadventures. Expect to see the re-emergence of homos in the NFL, or perhaps bullying, or perhaps new gun control proposals.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:01 AM (kJMDJ)

47 What an idiot Obama is.. he has freaked out the whole world for a week.. URGENT!!! MUST BE DONE NOW!!!! England scrambles to vote ... Now he passes the buck .. its no hurry now. Now we hear the state department say he will bomb regardless what congress says. Its amateur hour for sure but its dangerous incompetent hour too. Screw Syria. Yes chemical weapons are horrible.. but there is NO proof who used them. Even if its Assad.. are we really going to help Al Qaeda? Obama is a nutcase. God help us.

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at September 01, 2013 09:02 AM (DGIjM)

48 If it's not love then it's the bomb, the bomb, the bomb, the bomb that will bring us together

Posted by: Some Syrian Somewhere at September 01, 2013 09:02 AM (ELdpj)

49 Has Aaron Sorkin been sitting in on these meetings? #Newsroom “@nbcnightlynews: Kerry: Samples from #Syria tested positive for Sarin.”—
Michelle Martin (@ShoeGal1105) September 01, 2013

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 02:01 PM

Obama: "Did you order the Red Line Violation!!"

Assad: "You're goddamn right I did!!!!"

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 09:02 AM (/9IC1)

50 me yesterday
http://minx.cc/?blog=86&post=342985#c21104332
wanna boast
.....
so no matter what happens, Obama and the MSM will blame the Republicans in Congress. Way to go, Jefe.

Posted by: Mallfly at September 01, 2013 09:02 AM (bJm7W)

51 Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 02:01 PM (/9IC1) I'm a little surprised that anyone actually watches The Newsroom, and thus could reference it.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 01, 2013 09:03 AM (XW66B)

52 Wait....Southern California?

Never mind.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 02:00 PM (gqgiP)

duh, straight out of this morning's LA Times.  it was 8 degrees hotter than hell here yesterday and they still got over 100 dumbasses out there.  Go, tiny-brained!!

Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 09:03 AM (8lmkt)

53 David Sirota?

Posted by: Charlie Gibson at September 01, 2013 09:03 AM (Aif/5)

54 Send in Jesse Jackson and Dennis Rodman.

Posted by: Sphynx at September 01, 2013 09:03 AM (cll/q)

55 The Plan is to make Obama's critics (us) chase our tails while he rams through his radical agenda. And we fall for it...every time.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:03 AM (kJMDJ)

56 We should do absolutely nothing in Syria. There are at least three groups fighting & no way to tell who is good. I suspect they are all no good. Let them kill each other. McCain & Graham should STFU for once.

Posted by: CarolT at September 01, 2013 09:04 AM (z4WKX)

57 Reports that this chemical weapons attack was an own goal scored by our poorly trained martyrs due to a handling mishap are debased lies perpetrated by the Miley Cyrus.  And the Joos.

Posted by: Ali Baba, Al-Qaeda of Syria Spokesmodel at September 01, 2013 09:04 AM (Q9qpj)

58 I thought somebody posted a link yesterday to a story that it was actually the "rebels" who had fucked up and gassed all those people by mistake.  I didn't pursue it at the time because, well, giant screaming vaginas!

Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 09:04 AM (8lmkt)

59 I have been reading the Times of Israel on my iPad. SCOAMF is not as popular as he thinks he is.

Posted by: CarolT at September 01, 2013 09:05 AM (z4WKX)

60 Barry will talk all hairy chested until congress,both parties, say no, and then he will talk regretfully about respecting the will of congress. He is the guy in a bar fight who picked on t he wrong person , and now desperately wants his friends to hold him back. What a pathetic excuse for a man.

Posted by: pep at September 01, 2013 09:05 AM (6TB1Z)

61

What the hell are we doing contemplating going to war in support of al Qaeda?

 

 

It's what Rashid wanted for his birthday.

Posted by: Barakhenaten I at September 01, 2013 09:06 AM (Jgpr1)

62 FOX's use of a still pic of Teh JEF hitting the links after making his Syria statement is priceless. 

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 09:06 AM (jucos)

63
White House war-fags are already saying Off the Record that Obama will attack regardless of what Congress does. These a**holes never sleep

So we're fighting for Team AQ now. F'ing spiffy.

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at September 01, 2013 09:06 AM (0IhFx)

64 O/T
To all who were commenting on the gun thread, and in particular,"Timon".
Sorry for disappearing, but had to leave ace's house for Gods house.

I will try to start something on "The Group" about maybe a meetup in the Baltimore area without cluttering up this thread.


Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at September 01, 2013 09:06 AM (dEC8z)

65 It's weird that--after Obama went for a walk with McDonough and conferred with some of his younger staff--(and non-security experts)--he gained sudden clarity because they had finally strategized against their real enemy- It's part of my theory that the White House is split. There are the (younger) political advisers who are completely tied to petty short-term political victories and others who are concerned with legacy, etc. (Nobody really cares about the good of the country.) Obama tries to placate them all, being the little passive-aggressive twerp that he is. So he goes with one group one day and the next group the next.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 01, 2013 09:06 AM (xSegX)

66
I consulted with President Obama, and we both agree the sooner we bomb Peruvia, the atrocities against its people will cease. 

Posted by: Joey Biden at September 01, 2013 09:06 AM (pJF+c)

67 Have you all seen this? From Glenn Beck. Disturbing who Obama is supporting. http://tinyurl.com/mge3qj4

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (DGIjM)

68 The Syrian Dictator is gassing his own children!  Now watch this drive.

Posted by: Preznit Urkel X at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (jucos)

69 58 I thought somebody posted a link yesterday to a story that it was actually the "rebels" who had fucked up and gassed all those people by mistake. I didn't pursue it at the time because, well, giant screaming vaginas!



Hey, have you got their twitter handle?

Posted by: Anthony Weiner at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (cll/q)

70 Anyone else get the feeling Kerry's playing his own game here? *** Kerry was sent out Friday to whip up support for immediate bombing. Yesterday Obama cut the legs out from under him. Today Kerry is sent out to prove how bold, courageous, and resolute Obama is. Kerry is twisting slowly, slowly in the wind.

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (VlXYw)

71 Proof?? You want PROOF? Obama said so. That's all the proof you need. Plus, didn't you see all that compelling video of sheet-covered bodies and babies with little oxygen masks on their faces? That's proof enough.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (kJMDJ)

72

Headwinds.

How do they fuckin' work?

Posted by: Syrian Freedom Fighter at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (Jgpr1)

73 There's another question that needs to be answered. Where is the proof that the Sarin gas was used by Assad instead of the terrorists masked as freedom fighters? *********** Well they've given some real specifics about that. One thing about specifics like that--a lot of very good people know the specifics and--with more time if they are lying or exaggerating the leaks will come out. Now that it goes to Congress the source for leaks increases 100 fold so... The specifics. The three day set up. the trajectory of the weapons--from Assad held territory landing in rebel territory. The command and control structure that made that happen. The after action by Assad--bombing the areas that the UN wanted to inspect with conventional weapons to change the environment and condition of the evidence. Plus this does allow the UN --to gather whatever they will. If Obama was lying--a faster response would be the action to take. Not the AUMF route.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (r2PLg)

74 Barry should do what he does best, besides golf. Take his community organizing experience along with a team from the ACLU to Syria and sue the ever loving shit out of them.

Posted by: Bosk at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (buAeV)

75 21 So you're saying we're on David Sirota's side of an issue.


Sigh.


Off to recalibrate the webcam to get the ick of that off of me.
Posted by: alexthechick - Team SMOD at September 01, 2013 01:55 PM

Funny Twitter trolling going on with Bike Boy Johnson trolling Sirota on Twitter over the NSA and PRISM issues

Now Sirota questioning the war which Chucky says is necessary because Obama says so ought to ramp it up

Except that Sirota blocked him after Jazzy's typical "are we there yet" type repeated asking of the same question

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (/9IC1)

76 Why would Congress even pick it up? They're not the UN.

Posted by: t-bird at September 01, 2013 09:07 AM (FcR7P)

77 55
The Plan is to make Obama's critics (us) chase our tails while he rams through his radical agenda.

And we fall for it...every time.


Yeah, right.  It's always a five dimensional chess game for some fucking people.  You need to work in a cliche like "the center will not hold!" to really be portentous, however.

Hell of a plot, what with getting the British Parliament to play along though.  All so we can chase our tails or some bullshit like that.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:08 AM (Q9qpj)

78 Maybe Assad will die laughing.
From laughing gas???

Posted by: [/i]andycanuck[/b] at September 01, 2013 09:08 AM (uH46F)

79 My ennui might be reaching escape velocity, because I simply don't give a rat's ass about the Syrians.

But...what exactly does Obama (pbuh) want the military to do?

A few carefully placed cruise missiles can take out some (not all) communications, command-and-control, etc. But if he wants to kill tanks and artillery and movable stuff, then we will be using A-10s and F-16s, and that fills me with dread.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:08 AM (gqgiP)

80 Strange weather this Summer.  It was the coolest Summer I have ever seen with no 100s and very few 90s.  And here we are now Sep 1 and it is 94°.

Posted by: Vic at September 01, 2013 09:09 AM (zZbNF)

81
McCain & Graham should STFU for once.

Hahahahahha! Ah....hah!

Those two clowns can't help injecting themselves into every little thing, and while STFU might be off the table, we can always dream that the voters back home decide to put those two out to pasture.

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at September 01, 2013 09:09 AM (0IhFx)

82 Yeah, I get the impression Kerry is trying to look all presidential and shit.

Posted by: Sphynx at September 01, 2013 09:09 AM (cll/q)

83 >>I thought somebody posted a link yesterday to a story that it was actually the "rebels" who had fucked up and gassed all those people by mistake Can't speak to the reliability of this but there were reports back in May that Turkish security forces had found Sarin gas in the home of al Qaeda types that were basing in southern Turkey for attacks in Syria. http://tinyurl.com/lucmqyo I've seen no proof yet that links these attacks to Assad. And I don't understand why in the hell he would do it anyway.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:09 AM (g1DWB)

84 I actually listened to a good part of John F'ing Kerry's speech on Syria and it sounded like a pretty good justification for going to war in Iraq.  Except Syria didn't sign any agreements to cease hostilities in a previous war.

Kinda makes ya think that the Dems (especially Obama, Kerry, and Hillary) were undermining the President during a time of war in order to gain political power, and not because they had any moral objections to the war itself.

Nah, that could never happen.

Posted by: Rufus T. Firefly at September 01, 2013 09:10 AM (ymovd)

85 Obama said in his speech that his military option will be just as effective a month from now. I just heard Kerry tell Chris Wallace that it becomes *more* effective as time passes. Perhaps Obama can procrastinate until it becomes unstoppable?

Posted by: Anachronda at September 01, 2013 09:10 AM (U82Km)

86 Yeah it's unpossible to think the same people who make IEDs can make a homemade chemical-laced bomb. Bleach is so hard to come by, you know.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:10 AM (kJMDJ)

87 It's a three letter word: BOMB

Posted by: Joe Biden, after a do-it-yourself trepan at September 01, 2013 09:10 AM (Q9qpj)

88 Me: All right, I'll go in there for Dorothy. Wicked Witch or no Wicked Witch, guards or no guards, I'll tear them apart. I may not come out alive, but I'm going in there. There's only one thing I want you fellows to do.

Congress: What's that?

Me: Talk me out of it!

Posted by: The Almighty Bronco Bama at September 01, 2013 09:10 AM (1I4sj)

89 Maybe a three way ticket for the Dems in 2016 -- Biden, Sir Hilary, and Man Called Horse

Posted by: Sphynx at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (cll/q)

90
Assad: How can I believe you!?

Obama Administration: Okay we will do this AUMF thing--where I promise--if I spank you for longer than 60 days it will hurt me more than it hurts you....deal?

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 01:57 PM (r2PLg)


We'll know if the fix is in if Bashar starts referring to the Speaker of the US House of Representatives as "the cruel, bloodthirsty warlord, John Boehner".

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (HjPtV)

91 For the "Ace is banning people like crazy" conspiracy theorists -- the last permanent banning happened on the 22AUG, before than 1AUG.  I probably did both of them

Post Aug 22 I gave a couple of people one or two day time-outs after warnings they failed to heed and they've since been reinstated.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (9MLX+)

92 It's part of my theory that the White House is split. There are the (younger) political advisers who are completely tied to petty short-term political victories and others who are concerned with legacy, etc. (Nobody really cares about the good of the country.) **************** Good hypothesis. Denis has intrigued me for a long time. He has his feet in both camps I think. He's unusually influential. Also he has a bad temperament. Funny his "expertise" is "Latin America"-.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (r2PLg)

93 anyone besides me wondering if Kerry is thinking of trying another run for Pres in 2016? Acting like he's running the show would be another feather in his mysterious CIA hat. If anything good actually came out of all this, at least he could boast of accomplishing something, more than Hillary! did in her four of... well, name anything she accomplished in any four year period. (Besides pinching linen from the WH bathrooms.)

Posted by: Mallfly at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (bJm7W)

94 Put Issa in charge, nothing will happen.

Posted by: 13times at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (fGPLK)

95 So awesome that Axelrod thinks it's great that Obama can tease war and bombing in the middle east just as a way to trip up Republicans. Teasing and playing at regional war for domestic political advantage. Fucking statesmen.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (ZPrif)

96
Obama golfs while daddy prepares to counter the attack.  Obama is how you say.....a toad.

Posted by: Hafez Bashar-al-Assad, 11-year old son o at September 01, 2013 09:11 AM (pJF+c)

97 Come on, Spike.  Just give the word, and we'll bomb 'em back to the stone age.  We've got a rock hard boner, Spike.  Let's do this.

Posted by: Senators Queeg and Goober, wagging their tails at September 01, 2013 09:12 AM (Q9qpj)

98 re 89: a Man called Horse and a woman built like one? Too confusing.

Posted by: Mallfly at September 01, 2013 09:12 AM (bJm7W)

99 All so we can chase our tails or some bullshit like that. We'll see if you change your tune when next week we'll be back to immigration reform and twerking.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:13 AM (kJMDJ)

100 83 I've seen no proof yet that links these attacks to Assad. And I don't understand why in the hell he would do it anyway. But there's no way the rebels could have faked a hundred youtube videos!

Posted by: Your Tax Dollars at Work at September 01, 2013 09:13 AM (U82Km)

101 It wouldn't take much to ground Assad's Air Force and that would level the playing field.  The real question is why.  Why would we be supporting AQ and Hezb fighters in the Syrian shithole.  We should double down and support Assad.  He represents stability that is needed next door to Israel, Americas real friend in the region. 

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 09:13 AM (jucos)

102 85 Obama said in his speech that his military option will be just as effective a month from now. I just heard Kerry tell Chris Wallace that it becomes *more* effective as time passes.

Perhaps Obama can procrastinate until it becomes unstoppable?
Posted by: Anachronda at September 01, 2013 02:10 PM

That right there is the Moron way of commentary

Threadwinner


Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 09:14 AM (/9IC1)

103 For the "Ace is banning people like crazy" conspiracy theorists -- the last permanent banning happened on the 22AUG, before than 1AUG. I probably did both of them. Post Aug 22 I gave a couple of people one or two day time-outs after warnings they failed to heed and they've since been reinstated. Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 02:11 PM (9MLX+) So, Purp = torture's Ace's Handmaiden of þe Banhammer?

Posted by: The Handmaiden's Hat at September 01, 2013 09:14 AM (Vk2pI)

104 Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 02:11 PM (9MLX+)

You're just his lacky (probably foreign-born), doing his evil bidding, swinging the ban hammer with impunity.

Posted by: Slim-hipped-hipster who lives in a shitty 4th floor walkup at September 01, 2013 09:15 AM (gqgiP)

105 Plus why do all this scheming and plotting to make us chase our tails, when the two fuckfaces, McCain and Graham, have their sad puppy faces on while their master contemplates that heaping plate of foreign intervention.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:15 AM (Q9qpj)

106 I'm sure no Democrats will get their dicks in the wringer over this vote. Tell the President "No" to mollify your peaceniks--no sweat. Right?

Posted by: spongeworthy at September 01, 2013 09:15 AM (r5w1L)

107 Ace, you still haunting this thread? I was wondering if you saw NOW YOU SEE ME and what you, a fan of Chris Angell, thought of it.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:15 AM (kJMDJ)

108 hey, remember that press conference Obama had a few years ago with Bill Clinton? Who was the President that day?

Posted by: Mallfly at September 01, 2013 09:16 AM (bJm7W)

109

"Syria using Chemical Weapons is a very serious matter.  We must act immediately to resolve things as quickly as possibly.  That's why I'm going to wait until congress comes back to make their decision.  Now if you'll excuse me I've got a 3:45 tee time."

 

-Barack Obama

Posted by: buzzion at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (LI48c)

110 If Lurch is reading from "Newsroom" scripts about reports of Sarin gas ...

Is Jay Carney watching West Wing DVDs to see what CJ said to those obstinate nasty reporters?

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (/9IC1)

111 Three Toed Sloths love car-chasing too, they're just more subtle about it.

Posted by: Moron in a Members Only Snuggie at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (Ks4nX)

112 We'll know if the fix is in if Bashar starts referring to the Speaker of the US House of Representatives as "the cruel, bloodthirsty warlord, John Boehner". Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 02:11 PM (HjPtV) *************** LOL!

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (r2PLg)

113 Great point Axlerod! Oh. Wait. It does not make a whit of sense, just like the rest of the nonsense you spew.

Posted by: pat at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (7mNxs)

114 As far as "Why would Assad use them?", probably to win a civil war and not get his head chopped off. We "know", as much as such things can be known, that Assad had stockpiled hundreds of tons of chem weapons. Why keep, protect and pay for them all while suffering the slings and arrows of global rebuke/sanctions, if you're never going to use them?

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (ZshNr)

115 MATT DAMON!

Posted by: Joe Biden at September 01, 2013 09:17 AM (bmp0d)

116

McCain and Graham are playing the game with / for Obama.

He needs them to push hard for a major campaign so his plan looks better.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 09:18 AM (Jgpr1)

117 Obama is the Chris Angel of War Fighten'.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 09:18 AM (jucos)

118 Yeah, I wonder who he got to expend that nerve agent so he could fucking push amnesty.  FFS. 

If he starts the amnesty drums beating again, it will be to distract attention away from his faceplant on Syria.

Or John le Carré is a political adviser to the White House, apparently.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:18 AM (Q9qpj)

119 I find it darkly humorous that The Great Speechifying Teleprompter Reader painted himself into red line corner by running his mouth. And that his "red line" was the hypothetical use of a "bunch of chemical weapons". Bunch of. Woah, woah, woah, don't get too technical on us there, Barry.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 01, 2013 09:18 AM (XW66B)

120 Did ace get the gun quiz right this morning?

Posted by: buzzion at September 01, 2013 09:19 AM (LI48c)

121 >>Plus this does allow the UN --to gather whatever they will. The UN tried to gather evidence the first time Sarin was used in Syria back in May. Obama was too busy to be outraged back then. This is what the head of the UN inspection team found. And there is still no consensus. http://tinyurl.com/cy9f43j By all accounts, Assad is winning this fight. Why would he be dumb enough to use Sarin on civilians knowing full well that some point it would get the world community to freak out? I'd kind of like some actual proof before the Tomahawks start flying.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:19 AM (g1DWB)

122 What's wrong with a limited Syrian bombing run, no matter the target, we score a win.

Posted by: 13times at September 01, 2013 09:19 AM (fGPLK)

123

I'm still not convinced that it was Assad who did the gassing.

 

Barky and his thralls lie all the time.

They lie about everything.

Posted by: wheatie at September 01, 2013 09:20 AM (Hy+VQ)

124 I don't do all the protracted navel gazing Ace does. 

With me, people get one warning, if they're lucky, then if they persist and exhibit the typical troll "ratcheting up line testing" pattern of behavior, I just summarily shoot'em without even engaging in the kabuki dance they so desperately seek.


Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 09:20 AM (9MLX+)

125

Gee, it's just too damn bad that all of that sequestration that Barky ordered so that he could dismantle the military went into effect just when he needed them the most, huh?

 

Chickens, roost - some assembly required.....

Posted by: Tereas in Fort Worth, TX at September 01, 2013 09:20 AM (PZ6/M)

126 Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 02:20 PM (9MLX+)

I'm guessing that guilt doesn't work on you very well.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:21 AM (gqgiP)

127 "old technology" update added, I think it's a pretty good point.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:21 AM (/IWYB)

128 If you haven't noticed, Obama's agenda has been progressing full-steam ahead for 4.5 years now. Meanwhile we've been all over the place opposin the shit outta Obama...to no avail. oh look, a royal baby!!

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:21 AM (kJMDJ)

129 If we bomb both sides equitably, I support this action.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 09:22 AM (Jgpr1)

130 By some accounts Assad is winning, but not by all. The rebels still control part of Damascus, not to mention entire other regions/ major cities. The O'Bagy article from yesterday helped add detail to the state of things on the ground. I suppose Assad could win today if he ceded half his country to the rebels, but is that winning?

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 09:22 AM (ZshNr)

131 Update: A commenter put this bee in my bonnet. When Obama was planning to strike Syria without Congressional authorization, word went out from his conspirators that there would probably be no presidential address on that matter. That Obama would not be on TV. They claimed this decision was made because TV is "old technology" and they would rely on the "new technology," apparently consisting of cutting-edge press releases, to note the US was now engaged in war without a vote in Congress. Obviously this decision was made because the strike would be unpopular and Obama didn't want to strongly associate himself with it. But notice that yesterday, when he announced the more popular decision to punt to Congress, suddenly the "old technology" of the Televised Address was totally relevant again. Unpopular Decision: TV is old technology. Obama will just Tweet his unilateral war. More Popular Decision: Straight to a national televised address. Interesting, no? ************* Damn it. YES. I forgot about that.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 09:22 AM (r2PLg)

132 JackStraw,

Have you not been paying attention?  It's all an intricate plot between Assad, Obama and the British Parliament to get us to chase our tails so Amnesty gets passed.

Proved beyond a shadow of a doubt and with...geometric logic.

We are such fools, we inhabitants of normalville.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:23 AM (Q9qpj)

133 So-- They know the information system is balkanized. I've been afraid of that for a long time.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 09:23 AM (r2PLg)

134 I think the GOP house should call Magic Johnson forth to testify as to what HE thinks we should do in Syria.

Posted by: Warden at September 01, 2013 09:23 AM (bmp0d)

135 What's wrong with a limited Syrian bombing run, no matter the target, we score a win.

Posted by: 13times at September 01, 2013 02:19 PM (fGPLK)

Because planes crash, pilots eject and get captured, cruise missiles fly off target and hit schools, etc.

If there is no clear objective that furthers American foreign policy goals, then we shouldn't do anything.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:23 AM (gqgiP)

136 >>>
Unpopular Decision: TV is old technology. Obama will just Tweet his unilateral war.

I changed this since to:


Unpopular Decision: TV is old technology. Obama will just Like his unilateral war on FaceBook.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:23 AM (/IWYB)

137 By all accounts, Assad is winning this fight. Why would he be dumb enough to use Sarin on civilians knowing full well that some point it would get the world community to freak out?

I'd kind of like some actual proof before the Tomahawks start flying.
Posted by: JackStraw


Excellent point, except for the fact that Al Qaeda would never use CW against civilians.  They're very averse to civilian consequences, even if they would help them get power.

Posted by: pep at September 01, 2013 09:24 AM (6TB1Z)

138 Unpopular Decision: TV is old technology. Obama will just Tweet his unilateral war. More Popular Decision: Straight to a national televised address. Ask Chuck Todd whether that's more evidence of deep-thinking principle in action.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 01, 2013 09:24 AM (XW66B)

139 "As far as "Why would Assad use them?", probably to win a civil war and not get his head chopped off."

Muammar Gaddafi gave up his nukes after watching the US and coalition forces annihilate Saddam's army and air force during Desert Storm.  What did that buy Gaddafi?  A YouTube snuff vid for the ages.   Benghazi, people.  Barry's astronomic failure of a foreign policy.

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 09:25 AM (HjPtV)

140 Maybe Assad will die laughing.


That's our only real hope at this point.  On that score, there's Kerry so the plan does have a chance.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at September 01, 2013 09:25 AM (ECVlr)

141 Wearing a bonnet is not very manly. Just sayin...

Posted by: Bosk at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (buAeV)

142 Never, Nevet, Never give up!

Posted by: Winston at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (DS2Ry)

143 Obama will just Like his unilateral war on FaceBook.
***************

1,500 likes =  mandate

It's in the Constitution. Well, implied at least.

Posted by: Warden at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (bmp0d)

144 Have you not been paying attention? It's all an intricate plot between Assad, Obama and the British Parliament to get us to chase our tails so Amnesty gets passed.

Damn that Queen Elizabeth.  What a bitch.

Posted by: Lyndon Larouche at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (6TB1Z)

145 Posted this on the other thread but it looks like it is dead.

The last of the golden era before the great collapse started from the combination of continuous wars and the rise of socialism in the US.


http://www.shorpy.com/node/15961

Posted by: Vic at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (zZbNF)

146 Ace,

The new technology is a beautiful filter for unpopular statements and decisions.

By the time it gets to the public at large, it has been sanitized for our protection.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (gqgiP)

147

The strangest part, to me, is the number of republicans -and the few conservatives- who believe this attack is a good idea.

What they are unwittingly telling us is that John Kerry is a courageous man, of such upright and moral character that we should believe anything he says about the evidence of Assad's guilt.

 Somehow, for some reason, I have trouble with their logic.

 

 

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 01, 2013 09:26 AM (klGLB)

148

T.Bone never went anywhere without his favorite bonnet.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 09:27 AM (Jgpr1)

149 Yeah, because the guy whose party controls the Senate and the White House (and the House the first two years of his Presidency) doesn't normally get most of what he wants or anything.

It's all because the opposition has done nothing but chase squirrels or something.  I mean, they've got a hand full of face cards or something-just like the Democrats did when Reagan had the Senate.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:27 AM (Q9qpj)

150 Tell us more about the Jews, Warren.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 01, 2013 09:27 AM (XW66B)

151 Live YouTube uploads from the missile's noses would be very cool. 

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 09:27 AM (9MLX+)

152 >>Have you not been paying attention? It's all an intricate plot between Assad, Obama and the British Parliament to get us to chase our tails so Amnesty gets passed. >>Proved beyond a shadow of a doubt and with...geometric logic. >>We are such fools, we inhabitants of normalville. I try to pay attention. Which is why I'm klnda curious why we supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Obama said nothing when they were burning Christian churches and murdering Christians. Also curious why Obama blamed an obvious terror attack in Benghazi on a youtube video and still hasn't bothered to try and catch the guys behind the attack despite the fact that we know who they are, Islamic radicals. And I'm even more curious why Obama would do anything, anything at all, to support the "freedom fighters" in Syria who are largely al Qaeda and other Islamic nuts who have been slaughtering civilians for over a year in Syria. This stuff does not add up and I am not a conspiracy theory kind of guy.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:27 AM (g1DWB)

153 Wouldn't this be a cheaper way and more contextually relevant way to settle this whole thing?

http://tinyurl.com/7268b5f


Posted by: Warden at September 01, 2013 09:28 AM (bmp0d)

154 135 Sir, you are a bloody genius, seriously.

Posted by: 13times at September 01, 2013 09:29 AM (fGPLK)

155 Two weeks and we know ever undeniable fact about the chem attack. Benghazi not so much. Sure thing, let's rush into this.

Posted by: RWC at September 01, 2013 09:29 AM (6TV0b)

156 CharlieBrown'sDildo, #79: "what exactly does Obama (pbuh) want the military to do?" I think this will be framed like Operation Desert Fox [sic]. The stated intent was to degrade Saddam Hussein's capability to wage aggressive war against his neighbors. Which is perfect, if you want to Make a Statement but not actually accomplish anything. Did you blow up a few tanks, or a building, or anything at all belonging to the government? Congratulations! You've degraded his ability. You can now quit anytime you like, or keep going for awhile. Up to you, Mr. President. Note that this kind of mission is not, as the President recently said of his plans for Syria, time-sensitive.

Posted by: JPS at September 01, 2013 09:30 AM (9ziuC)

157 But what about the children?!

Posted by: twisted pink panties at September 01, 2013 09:30 AM (LI48c)

158 Yeah, all those Republicans are just falling out their trees in their eagerness to back Kerry's Syria gambit, amirite, Bonehead?

What's the count, three or four so far?

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:30 AM (Q9qpj)

159 Three weeks it was all about Snowden. Before that, the IRS scandal (that began from a planted question). Funny how these big news stories simply evaporate to make room for a fresh new 'big' story without consequences.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:31 AM (kJMDJ)

160 This stuff does not add up

Maybe you need to reexamine your starting assumptions.  Like the ones about what motivates Obama and who he considers his "friends" to be.

Tweak that a bit and it'll all make a lot more sense.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 09:31 AM (9MLX+)

161 85 ---" I just heard Kerry tell Chris Wallace that it becomes *more* effective as time passes. Perhaps Obama can procrastinate until it becomes unstoppable? " Posted by: Anachronda at September 01, 2013 02:10 PM (U82Km) ----------------------- Yep. That's the thread winner.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at September 01, 2013 09:31 AM (C8mVl)

162 >>Excellent point, except for the fact that Al Qaeda would never use CW against civilians. They're very averse to civilian consequences, even if they would help them get power. I'm not sure if you're kidding but I suggest anyone who doubts that al Qaeda kills civilians by the truckload to go to youtube and search for al Nusra Syria.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:32 AM (g1DWB)

163 Axelrods's recent statements are simply part of the Permanent Campaign.

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 09:33 AM (HjPtV)

164 But what about the children?! Posted by: twisted pink panties at September 01, 2013 02:30 PM (LI48c) …and the Middle Class

Posted by: The Middle Class Hat at September 01, 2013 09:33 AM (Vk2pI)

165

Obama thinks the Two State Solution is the key to Middle East Policy. 

He surrounds himself with people who champion the cause of palestine.  Every move he makes is meant to  destabilize the region  and force Israel's hand at the  negotiating table.  

He wants his legacy to be a palestinian  state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 09:33 AM (Jgpr1)

166 Muammar Gaddafi gave up his nukes after watching the US and coalition forces annihilate Saddam's army and air force during Desert Storm. What did that buy Gaddafi? A YouTube snuff vid for the ages. Benghazi, people. Barry's astronomic failure of a foreign policy.
***
God, I miss Reagan and the 80s.  I remember laughing my ass  after watching Al Haig walk out to the podium after the Libyan Attitude Adjustment Hour and ending his statement with "..and we were not trying to assassinate General Gaddafi..."

A minute later there was news footage of a bunch of Libyans standing around with Gaddafi in the ruins of his bedroom looking at a 500 pound bomb that failed to detonate embedded in the carpet.

Yeah, he got the message alright....


Posted by: B at September 01, 2013 09:33 AM (6iEQd)

167 Wait, I thought we made that deal with the British Parliament so Barrack could get amnesty passed.

No one said anything to me about Snowden.

I've been bamboozled.  Hoodwinked.  run amok.

Posted by: Assad at September 01, 2013 09:33 AM (Q9qpj)

168 It's because he is an asshole.

Posted by: Madamex at September 01, 2013 09:33 AM (YIixn)

169 >>>Wearing a bonnet is not very manly. Just sayin...

it's a combination bonnet and logging saw.

Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:34 AM (/IWYB)

170 Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 02:31 PM (9MLX+)

Obama loves rebellion in all its forms.

He loved being an anti-establishment community organizer, he loved fighting against the status quo of 200 years of constitutional dominance, he loves supporting rebels, no matter that they are bloodthirsty animals who will commit genocide the second they are in power.

It is the tweaking of "The Man" that he gets off on.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:35 AM (gqgiP)

171 One thing is for sure, after pouring billions and billions of American tax dollars and making countless diplomatic concessions to every nation on Earth to prevent widespread use of WMDs, we're invested. So was the rest of the world until people actually started using them.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 09:35 AM (ZshNr)

172 this is the part where you, a graduate of the Ace School of Argument, ramp up the 'conspiracy' mockery

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:35 AM (UZeIu)

173 Hey sooth, the Matrix was just a movie.

Posted by: Keanu Reeves at September 01, 2013 09:35 AM (Q9qpj)

174 I'm not sure if you're kidding but I suggest anyone who doubts that al Qaeda kills civilians by the truckload to go to youtube and search for al Nusra Syria.

Yes, kidding.  I thought it was over the top enough that a sarc tag wasn't needed (not that I know how to do that anyway).

Posted by: pep at September 01, 2013 09:35 AM (6TB1Z)

175 133 They know the information system is balkanized. That's because the Obamaphos aren't smart enough. We need to double down on the military sequester so that we can afford to distribute smarter Obamaphos to drag the LIV into the 21st century.

Posted by: Your Tax Dollars at Work at September 01, 2013 09:35 AM (U82Km)

176 Jumbo Shrimp, That was disturbing! The terrorist ate the liver of the man he killed.

Posted by: CarolT at September 01, 2013 09:36 AM (z4WKX)

177 What's wrong with a limited Syrian bombing run, no matter the target, we score a win.

Posted by: 13times


The same thing that was wrong of GHWBush's Iraq retreat; when you strike at a king, you must kill him.

Part of the reason why the GOP is stuck in the peanut gallery for the foreseeable is because had GWH taken care of Iraq in 92, W wouldn't have had to torch the GOP's brand over Iraq in the 2000's. He could have stuck with Candidate Bush's ban on 'nation building,' which was, you know, the conservative position. But no, we had to learn that lesson all over again.

Nothing good comes from fighting a war half-assed.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at September 01, 2013 09:36 AM (oH/yX)

178 It is the tweaking of "The Man" that he gets off on. After this week, I read "tweaking" wrong and shivered.

Posted by: Waterhouse at September 01, 2013 09:36 AM (XW66B)

179 Obama loves rebellion in all its forms.

He loved being an anti-establishment community organizer, he loved fighting against the status quo of 200 years of constitutional dominance, he loves supporting rebels, no matter that they are bloodthirsty animals who will commit genocide the second they are in power.

It is the tweaking of "The Man" that he gets off on.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 02:35 PM (gqgiP)

 

There is a flaw to your theory you know.

 

The Green Revolution in Iran.

Posted by: buzzion at September 01, 2013 09:37 AM (LI48c)

180

It would be cool if there were a super hero known as 'The Procrastinator'.

 

Like the red phone rings and there's a robbery in progress, so he changes to his robe and slippers, puts on some coffee and sits down.

Posted by: Moron in a Members Only Snuggie at September 01, 2013 09:37 AM (Ks4nX)

181

He's a giant screaming asshole.

 

Some artist should do an exhibit of him...and name it 'The Rape of America'.

 

Posted by: wheatie at September 01, 2013 09:37 AM (Hy+VQ)

182 Did you know that I served in Vietnam?

Posted by: Sec. John Kerry at September 01, 2013 09:37 AM (Aif/5)

183 Ramping up the 'conspiracy' mockery is the correct response to Prison Planet Rube Goldberg machine conspiracy contraptions constructed from bits of bad spy novels.

Posted by: The Ace School of Argument at September 01, 2013 09:37 AM (Q9qpj)

184 i haven't seen Now You See Me but I definitely will.

Stop grousing about your burning need to have every conspiracy theory that crosses the transom of your brain Taken Seriously You Guys

Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:38 AM (/IWYB)

185 The Green Revolution in Iran. -------- Eh, can't go against friends.

Posted by: Preezy Baracka at September 01, 2013 09:39 AM (Aif/5)

186 Pep, "I thought it was over the top enough that a sarc tag wasn't needed." The problem with that reasoning is, your comment was no dumber than some of the serious statements by senior government officials on the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, the prospects of negotiating with "moderate Taliban," the impossibility of Iran ever, ever helping al Qaeda, and so forth.

Posted by: JPS at September 01, 2013 09:39 AM (9ziuC)

187 What do people think of the banner picture on Drudge of Obama's foot on the Presidential Desk? I was surprised how much it angered me.

Posted by: Jose at September 01, 2013 09:39 AM (zc/sw)

188 >>>Wearing a bonnet is not very manly. Just sayin...

Wasn't there a Firefly episode that started with Adam Baldwin on a wagon seat wearing a bonnet and a dress?

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 09:39 AM (HjPtV)

189 you know... even in my movie about Conspiracy Theories, only one of them was actually true.


Posted by: Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory at September 01, 2013 09:40 AM (/IWYB)

190 This is a textbook example of  letting a crisis go to waste.

Posted by: Raham Emmanuel at September 01, 2013 09:40 AM (Jgpr1)

191 The problem with that reasoning is, your comment was no dumber than some of the serious statements by senior government officials on the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, the prospects of negotiating with "moderate Taliban," the impossibility of Iran ever, ever helping al Qaeda, and so forth.

I stand corrected.

Posted by: pep at September 01, 2013 09:41 AM (6TB1Z)

192 It's not a goddam conspiracy theory. Obama and the media are engaged in manipulating the 'news.' Are you really going to argue with that?

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 09:41 AM (UZeIu)

193 Mel,

That's because you were attempting to discredit the actual truth because you are a lackey of the Capitalist Ruling Class and also Jews.


Posted by: Oliver Stone at September 01, 2013 09:41 AM (/IWYB)

194
Wearing a bonnet is not very manly. Just sayin...
Posted by: Bosk




Wanna bet?

http://www.zarthani.net/Images/time_crime-freas.jpg

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at September 01, 2013 09:41 AM (kdS6q)

195 >>>That's because you were attempting to discredit the actual truth because you are a lackey of the Capitalist Ruling Class and also Jews.

Do you know nothing of my work?


Posted by: Mel Gibson at September 01, 2013 09:42 AM (/IWYB)

196 The Green Revolution in Iran.

Posted by: buzzion at September 01, 2013 02:37 PM (LI48c)

Nope.

The Mullahs took down the ultimate insider; the Shah. He was put in power (at least according to the loonies) by the CIA, so supporting the current savages in Tehran is simply a continuation of their historical fight against the military-industrial complex and the corporate war movement and Halliburton.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:42 AM (gqgiP)

197 What do people think of the banner picture on Drudge of Obama's foot on the Presidential Desk?

I was surprised how much it angered me.



Bet you forgot all about the Amnesty bill when you saw that, am I right?

You were supposed to. That's the con, see?

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth, glancing around before he speaks...softly at September 01, 2013 09:42 AM (Q9qpj)

198 What do people think of the banner picture on Drudge of Obama's foot on the Presidential Desk? ------- Jeez people, Reggie was on his way. Just trying to get some pre-coital stretching in while doing a bit of work.

Posted by: King Barack at September 01, 2013 09:42 AM (Aif/5)

199 188 >>>Wearing a bonnet is not very manly. Just sayin...

Wasn't there a Firefly episode that started with Adam Baldwin on a wagon seat wearing a bonnet and a dress?

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 02:39 PM (HjPtV)

 

Absolutely not.  That was Nathan Fillion.

 

"But if your hand touches metal, I swear by my pretty floral bonnet    that    I will end you."

Posted by: buzzion at September 01, 2013 09:43 AM (LI48c)

200

Obama should send Bobby Riggs over to lose to Syria in surprisingly easy fashion.

 

*wink*

Posted by: Rod Laver's Pool Boy at September 01, 2013 09:43 AM (Ks4nX)

201

Are you really going to argue with that?

 

 

Yes.  All of us will.  

And we'll all  use the exact same key-phrases just to mock you.

 

Posted by: Journolist at September 01, 2013 09:43 AM (Jgpr1)

202 >>>It's not a goddam conspiracy theory. Obama and the media are engaged in manipulating the 'news.'

no, I just posted about that, Sally.

So I'm confused as to how the Ace Stylebook of Argument would now compel me to argue against myself.

Actually I'm not confused. You wish to take clear evidence of an intent to manipulate the news as soft proof of all other conspiracy theories that occur to you.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:43 AM (/IWYB)

203 FREE MISS MARPLE !

Posted by: agony of da feet at September 01, 2013 09:43 AM (qQk+U)

204 >>Yes, kidding. I thought it was over the top enough that a sarc tag wasn't needed (not that I know how to do that anyway). Yea, I thought so. But a lot of people seem unaware of who Assad is fighting. The largest and most powerful group is al Qaeda. They took out a village in northern Syria earlier this year and slaughtered over 400 civilians including women and children. And for those who keep insisting this is some sort of conspiracy theory, please explain this. Is the Turkish government, which hates Assad, making this up? http://tinyurl.com/lw2eboo I'd still like to see some actual proof before we start taking the side of our most deadly enemy.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:44 AM (g1DWB)

205 I'm still trying to figure out what was so bad about the bad writing in that Bulwer Lytton fiction contest in the book thread. That's top drawer stuff.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at September 01, 2013 09:44 AM (8cMnP)

206 I’m going to go outside or try to go & take care of my roses. I fully enjoyed Wallace pressing Kerry on the urgency of this mission. He was my senator my entire adult life until he because SOS. BTW, shouldn’t SOD make case for military involvement? The JEF wrote the authorization yesterday and it involves using troops if necessary. I found it on Times of Israel website. I hope that FNS Panel does not have Bill Kristol, he’s all for this and regime change too.

Posted by: CarolT at September 01, 2013 09:44 AM (z4WKX)

207 They manipulated us too.  And those nice young fellows who tried to move those booby-trapped sarin cannisters.

He couldn't just get Amnesty passed the old-fashioned way, what with pork and bribes and stuff. 

Posted by: British Parliament at September 01, 2013 09:44 AM (Q9qpj)

208 I stand corrected, and humbled by the manliness of the simple bonnet.

Posted by: Bosk at September 01, 2013 09:45 AM (buAeV)

209 Amateur hour?  More like an amateur five years thus far.

Posted by: Titanium at September 01, 2013 09:45 AM (zHWyo)

210

They manipulated us too

 

 

THEY PLAYED ON OUR FEARS!

Posted by: Al Gore at September 01, 2013 09:46 AM (Jgpr1)

211 As Donald Sensing points out, Obama appears to be setting us up for a two-pronged Constitutional crisis.

If he moves ahead without Congressional approval *and* the military is still willing to follow his orders, we have a monarch with a military he can use any way he wants.

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at September 01, 2013 09:46 AM (FvyJS)

212 I don't believe the intel community is lying when they say assad launched rockets with gas. No need to posit that everything is a lie to think bombing Syria is a bad idea.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 09:46 AM (ZPrif)

213 I don't think we'll ever have 100% proof. Even if someone presented a huge "100% certain the corpses tested positive for Sarin" case, we'd always question the presenter's motives. Or if he used the right test, or if the test was too old, etc.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 09:46 AM (ZshNr)

214 Obama is actually Satan, abroad on the Earth, seeking to mislead and divide us for the coming Apocalypse.


Posted by: Guy Who Thinks He's an Aggrieved Minority Due to his Penchant for Conspiracism at September 01, 2013 09:47 AM (/IWYB)

215 I'd still like to see some actual proof before we start taking the side of our most deadly enemy. Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 02:44 PM **** They hate us for our culture of vagina sculpting.

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 09:47 AM (MhA4j)

216 Always a pleasure soothie, really.  Have a great Sunday, in whatever manner seems best to you.

Good night, all.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at September 01, 2013 09:47 AM (Q9qpj)

217 Unpopular Decision: TV is old technology. Obama will just Like his unilateral war on FaceBook. Ha!

Posted by: AmishDude at September 01, 2013 09:47 AM (xSegX)

218 Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 02:43 PM (/IWYB)

The transitive property of conspiracies: All evidence supports the existence of the conspiracy. Even evidence that directly contradicts anecdotal evidence of a conspiracy is used to prove the existence of a more significant conspiracy to protect the original conspiracy.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (gqgiP)

219

That should have  been 'Preyed'. 

Sorry.  My mind goes all to hell when my Chakras get backed up.

Posted by: Al Gore at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (Jgpr1)

220 Ace is here on a weekend? Have you finally hunted all the hobos in your area to extinction?

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (GEICT)

221 Even David Sirota gets it. That pic makes me want to beat the hell out of him. Not because he pisses me off (he's too much of a joke for that), but because it would just be one of those easy beat downs.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (8cMnP)

222 Like my war on Facebook! Follow my war on Twitter!

Posted by: Barack Obama at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (xSegX)

223 Absolutely not. That was Nathan Fillion.

"But if your hand touches metal, I swear by my pretty floral bonnet that I will end you."

Posted by: buzzion at September 01, 2013 02:43 PM (LI48c)


LOL.  I stand corrected.  Thanks!

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (HjPtV)

224 The MSM is talking as if Bush never went to Congress or the UN for approval, nor consulted with our allies

He did all of that. The reason they said Bush went it alone was because France said no

Now Hollande wants to go in but now he's got a problem that the French people don't want any part of it and the French parliament is asking for a vote and Hollande won't go in without their consent

If the French Parliament votes "non", then the MSM has a real dilemma on their hands since they consider the French to be the Voice of the World

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (/9IC1)

225  I caught a little of the MSM over the last week and was amazed at how..what's the word?..... Warlike?... they are now. It's an amazing transformation.

Posted by: Bosk at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (buAeV)

226 While we're mulling memes to toss out there while this gets debated in congress, I'd like to suggest the following.

The 2001 AUMF against Al Qaeda and its affiliates made them legally our enemies. Any attack on Assad effectively materially supports the AQ affiliates in Syria. Which makes such action treason. For anyone involved, but with particular emphasis on congresscritters supporting the action. Unless, I suppose, they amend or cancel the 2001 AUMF first.

It's probably to extreme to be popular, but I think it could be beneficial as far as the old 'poisoning the well' goes.

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (hO9ad)

227

If Congress says NO! and Barky goes on ahead anyway,  is that not grounds right there for impeachment*?

 

 

I know the Dem Senate would never convict, because democratium, but for shooting-the-shit-to-pass-the-time-before-SMOD, sort of understanding.

Posted by: Count de Monet at September 01, 2013 09:48 AM (BAS5M)

228 The transitive property of conspiracies: All evidence supports the existence of the conspiracy. Even evidence that directly contradicts anecdotal evidence of a conspiracy is used to prove the existence of a more significant conspiracy to protect the original conspiracy. Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 02:48 PM (gqgiP) It conspiracies, conspiracies all the way down...

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at September 01, 2013 09:49 AM (GEICT)

229 No need to posit that everything is a lie to think bombing Syria is a bad idea.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 02:46 PM (ZPrif)

Bingo!

I'll stipulate for purposes of argument that Assad launched to missiles with explicit intent to commit mass murder.

The question is still: So?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:49 AM (gqgiP)

230

The MFM is missing an opportunity in that they are not using that pic of Obamas glistening pecs coming out of the surf.  I would bet that there are no similar pictures of Assad, hence.... A win.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 09:50 AM (jucos)

231 i vote seethsoother off the island.

Posted by: Miss Murple at September 01, 2013 09:50 AM (fxN9x)

232 212 ....we'd always question the presenter's motives. .... Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 02:46 PM ***** What we know to be 100% accurate... Obama and Kerry are liars and criminals... So why are they lying and what crime are they committing or trying to commit?

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 09:50 AM (MhA4j)

233 187 As it was intended to do.

Posted by: Tuna at September 01, 2013 09:50 AM (M/TDA)

234 And all conspiracies end up with the Jews. No matter where they start, all crazy people end up blaming the Jews.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 09:50 AM (ZPrif)

235 >>>I don't believe the intel community is lying when they say assad launched rockets with gas.

I'm not fond of False Flag You Guys stuff but as CMDR Salamander noted, look, Assad is winning this thing.  People who seem to be on the path to victory do not have an incentive to shake up the dynamics to their detriment.

Bear in mind, Pakistan's government is riddled with actual Al Qaeda terrorists (and that big other Pak terrorist group, JAM?).

The intelligence community says they don't know who in government launched that strike.

It is possible it was someone secretly loyal to AQ.  Stranger things have happened.

Now I don't reject the obvious conclusion-- that Assad DID launch this attack, just because people also do evil things which are contrary to their best interests.

That's possible.  Maybe even likely.

But we're getting pretty far out on a limb for "likely" things.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:50 AM (/IWYB)

236 keep making jokes about ace working on sunday and see what happens...

Posted by: Miss Murple at September 01, 2013 09:51 AM (fxN9x)

237 The transitive property of conspiracies: All evidence supports the existence of the conspiracy. Even evidence that directly contradicts anecdotal evidence of a conspiracy is used to prove the existence of a more significant conspiracy to protect the original conspiracy. Shit, we're talking about AGW again?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at September 01, 2013 09:51 AM (8cMnP)

238 Shit, we're talking about AGW again? Posted by: Burn the Witch at September 01, 2013 02:51 PM (8cMnP) I thought we were talking about banks....

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at September 01, 2013 09:52 AM (GEICT)

239 And all conspiracies end up with the Jews.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 02:50 PM (ZPrif)

That's axiomatic.

Really, I think we are sophisticated enough around here that we can just assume "and the Jews," tacked onto every conspiracy. It will save keystrokes.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:53 AM (gqgiP)

240 "Now I don't reject the obvious conclusion-- that Assad DID launch this attack, just because people also do evil things which are contrary to their best interests.

That's possible. Maybe even likely.

But we're getting pretty far out on a limb for "likely" things."

I think we need to take this to Mr. Universe.

Posted by: mrp at September 01, 2013 09:53 AM (HjPtV)

241 Why keep, protect and pay for them all while suffering the slings and arrows of global rebuke/sanctions, if you're never going to use them?

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 02:17 PM (ZshNr)


Well, using chem weapons in small amounts is foolish. Look at the ruckus stirred up over this recent so-called "chemical attack". (I subscribe to the theory that it was either a false-flag by the Al Qaeda faction in order to curry sympathy, or else a simple fuckup by muzzies, who are known to fuck up.)



I expect Assad is hanging on to his chemical weapons stocks in case he sees the need for a Samson option. "If Imma gonna go down, then so does the whole damn country!"

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at September 01, 2013 09:54 AM (60Q+L)

242 Assad had a big victory in Homs (?), but has been routed elsewhere. I don't think he thinks he's winning. And as more of the "Western armed and trained" forces show up to help the rebels, he might see writing on the wall that is invisible to us.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 09:54 AM (ZshNr)

243 That's possible. Maybe even likely.

But we're getting pretty far out on a limb for "likely" things.

Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 02:50 PM (/IWYB)

But trying to affix blame for the chemical weapons attack is focusing attention away from the larger issue; which is whether we should do anything about it.

That question doesn't change, no matter who used the chemicals.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 09:55 AM (gqgiP)

244 >>>Assad had a big victory in Homs (?), but has been routed elsewhere. I don't think he thinks he's winning

i'm not married to my impression, but I have to say this is the consistent impression i've gotten from news reports, and when I say news reports, I of course mean AllahPundit.

Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:55 AM (/IWYB)

245 It also goes back to this question.  Are the 99,000 Syrians killed by other means less tragic that the 1000 killed by gas?  If so, why?

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 09:55 AM (jucos)

246 >>I don't believe the intel community is lying when they say assad launched rockets with gas. Accept the intel community isn't saying that. Even Obama isn't saying that. They are saying that in their opinion the evidence leads in that direction but they do not have proof. What's the problem with Obama showing what evidence he has or are we now trusting Obama?

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 09:55 AM (g1DWB)

247 >>>But trying to affix blame for the chemical weapons attack is focusing attention away from the larger issue; which is whether we should do anything about it.

right.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:56 AM (/IWYB)

248 That question doesn't change, no matter who used the chemicals. Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 02:55 PM (gqgiP) It bears repeating...There Are No Good Guys. Both sides actively dislike us. Why in the world would we support either of them?

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at September 01, 2013 09:56 AM (GEICT)

249 when I say news reports, I of course mean AllahPundit.


Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (8lmkt)

250 Should we do anything about Syria or should we do anything about Chem weapons use from now going forward? If not, then I say we beef up our own stocks of the nastiest shit on the planet and start using it.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (ZshNr)

251 Baroque is a malignant narcissist preening and prancing pretender. The worst thing, evah, for a malignant narcissist is to be mocked. This is his real red line, it is not about the dead Syrians: his ego and giant chip on his bony shoulder. It is not about political risk for him, and he could care less about the Dems or the American people. He is also a Barney Fife who has always been picked on and delicate and bullied by racism all of his life, and that will be his argument in Congress if they vote No: he will blame the Republicans who prevented this and/or bomb anyway as he does also, bonus!, want to divert from scandals. He wants power, and to feel important, therefore his pigeon-toed foot on the desk. "His" military to use like toy soldiers. "His" executive order, as, so far, there is almost always nothing going on in Congress.

God forbid this was a serious threat to the USA. One would hope Congress could get their collective butts back to vote pronto. By the time they could return, Sept 9th or so, there will be less of a crisis as that boat sailed, uh, three days before children were allegedly murdered by sarin gas. I am just an aging supermodel, but wouldn't you think the prime time to stop this was before it happened if the intelligence were credible?

Posted by: ChristyBlinky's weekly comment at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (baL2B)

252 Even David Sirota gets it. That pic makes me want to beat the hell out of him... because it would just be one of those easy beat downs. Posted by: Burn the Witch at September 01, 2013 02:48 PM Any asshole who over rotates his shoulder like that needs a good beating to instruct him on his place in the Mammalian Order.

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (MhA4j)

253 The problem as I see it is, once the decision is handed to Congress, Congress will vote "yes."  Politicians are incapable of "doing nothing" while attention is being paid to them. 

The Great Depression wouldn't have lasted as long as it did if the Congress had "done nothing" instead of "let's fix this."

Posted by: Null at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (P7hip)

254 Barky doesn't know shit about much, but he's got Boehner's number. This is only a political risk for him if Congress does not vote for it. Did you read both responses from Republicans? Notice the Dems haven't responded?

Posted by: Chelsea blaster at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (NAU+F)

255 How is Graham’s primary opponent on this?

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (CeNUw)

256 The lethality didn't seem up to the standards one would expect from mil-grade agents and dispersal systems.

It did seem up to what some rebels might cook up in a basement or garage.

Unless Assad was running some double false-flag deal trying to frame the rebels by intentionally using substandard gear, I'm not buying that the Syrian govt did it.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (9MLX+)

257 personally I would love to bomb Assad to death but I can't support a strike which benefits Al Qaeda.

Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (/IWYB)

258 re 236: another example:
If the Jews control the government, why don't we have a Jewish President?
Well, duh, that would make it too obvious!
(an actual example from a genuine anti-Semitic publication)

Posted by: Mallfly at September 01, 2013 09:57 AM (bJm7W)

259 >>>But trying to affix blame for the chemical weapons attack is focusing attention away from the larger issue; which is whether we should do anything about it. right. Or whether a good outcome is possible, let alone likely.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 01, 2013 09:58 AM (xSegX)

260 "It also goes back to this question. Are the 99,000 Syrians killed by other means less tragic that the 1000 killed by gas? If so, why?" Ahh, the question that sends the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Were War Crimes™ crowd into sputtering fits. Nice play.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at September 01, 2013 09:58 AM (8cMnP)

261 Right. Intel community says Syrian army launched the rockets. Says they intercepted comms and planning. Yes, that doesn't prove Assad ordered it. But I don't like the chain of thought that ends up with, everything that guy just said is bullshit. I'm also not a big fan of cui bono analysis once we have specific claims being made. I thought the attacks were faked at first. I was wrong. Evidence was overwhelming it happened. I see some people still claiming it was all faked. That the dead kids were acting. That seems pretty far down crazy land to me. It's reasonable to suspect it at first since Palestinians have faked atrocities in the past. It happens. But once there's so much corroborating evidence, then that's no longer tenable.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 09:58 AM (ZPrif)

262 256 personally I would love to bomb Assad to death but I can't support a strike which benefits Al Qaeda. Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 02:57 PM (/IWYB) Ding ding ding. The enemy of my enemy is my friend only works when the enemy of the enemy doesn't hate your ass as much as the original enemy.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at September 01, 2013 09:58 AM (GEICT)

263 Stuff youse wanted to know: Leaving Market Basket (super market), I spotted a real life Three Wolf Moon T-shirt. I think it was worn in ironically, however.

Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 09:59 AM (z9HTb)

264 “The enemy of my enemy is my frenemy.”—The Jefferson Letters, Vol II, p. 183.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at September 01, 2013 10:01 AM (CeNUw)

265 182 Did you know that I served in Vietnam? Posted by: Sec. John Kerry at September 01, 2013 02:37 PM

What did you serve?

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:01 AM (/9IC1)

266 >>> Right. Intel community says Syrian army launched the rockets. Says they intercepted comms and planning.

i actually didn't know this, Flatbush Joe.

Is the actual evidence released? 

And let's not forget "CURVEBALL," our golden source on Iraq WMD.

I do like all the points you're making.  I too do not like the tendency to simply create a Narrative wherein all difficult decisions are transformed into easy ones, by simple denial of any troublesome fact.

But I'm also sort of wary of putting too much stock into what our intelligence people say they know they know.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 10:01 AM (/IWYB)

267 The Great Depression wouldn't have lasted as long as it did if the Congress had "done nothing" instead of "let's fix this."

Posted by: Null at September 01, 2013 02:57 PM (P7hip)

____________

Do you mean this Great Depression or the last one.......

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 10:01 AM (jucos)

268 Intel community says Syrian army launched the rockets. Says they intercepted comms and planning.

Right, and the rebels aren't in possession of any captured Syrian comms gear, and even if they were, they're of such pure virtue they'd never use it to frame Assad for one of their own pending attacks, knowing we'd be listening in.

Un-possible.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 10:01 AM (9MLX+)

269 What really gets to me is that Europe and the other sanctimonious members of the "international community" will bleat endlessly about how they "oppose" the use of chemical weapons. And when it comes time to do something about it, they beg the US to do it. We've slipped down that slope ourselves in accepting the Foreign Policy of Moral Preening.

Posted by: AmishDude at September 01, 2013 10:02 AM (xSegX)

270 The enemy of my enema is my friend

Posted by: Shit Joe Biden Says at September 01, 2013 10:02 AM (/9IC1)

271 (I subscribe to the theory that it was either a false-flag by the Al Qaeda faction in order to curry sympathy, or else a simple fuckup by muzzies, who are known to fuck up.)

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon


A commenter at Belmont Club suggested that it could have been FAE's that were trigger too low, dispersing the fuel without a secondary explosion.

The official US statement on the matter ruled out 'high explosives,' didn't explicitly rule out the FAE fuel.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at September 01, 2013 10:02 AM (kAPuS)

272 Intel community says Syrian army launched the rockets. Says they intercepted comms and planning. ***** What? Did they come over to your house and tell you about it or did you hear it from a media outlet that has, at every turn, lied for this political gang?

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 10:02 AM (MhA4j)

273 I remember Colin Powell making the case for Iraqi WMD that partly relied upon ambiguous communication intercepts.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 10:02 AM (/IWYB)

274 As sad as it is. I don't see it as in our national interest. At. All. It's long past time we stopped being the world police. Until  the Middle East steps into the 21st century and drops the pre-medieval lifestyle  they will always be a bloody shithole. Let it burn.

Posted by: Bosk at September 01, 2013 10:02 AM (buAeV)

275 I had a full-blooded Australian shepherd, complete alpha male, who chased a pickup truck, and caught it. He grabbed the rear tire by his teeth and the wheel whipped him around and rolled over his head. Too bad, he was a good dog.

Posted by: random idea generator at September 01, 2013 10:03 AM (MO24C)

276 That the dead kids were acting. That seems pretty far down crazy land to me.

Have we established the images of dead kids were legit?

I've seen debunking of one photo of hundreds of children wrapped in sheets that claimed to be from Syria last week, by the photographer that took in Iraq a decade ago.

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:03 AM (hO9ad)

277 There's nothing in typical FAE fuels that would cause nerve agent like symptoms to present.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 10:04 AM (9MLX+)

278 But I'm also sort of wary of putting too much stock into what our intelligence people say they know they know.

Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 03:01 PM

Kind of funny that now our intel guys are infallible on Syria, but what they said about Benghazi is sketchy because Youtube Video

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:04 AM (/9IC1)

279 I serve gin and tonics on my yacht daily.

Posted by: John Kerry at September 01, 2013 10:05 AM (Aif/5)

280 I serve gin and tonics on my yacht daily. You’re forgiven.

Posted by: Journalists with empty glasses at September 01, 2013 10:06 AM (CeNUw)

281 >>I thought the attacks were faked at first. I was wrong. Evidence was overwhelming it happened. I see some people still claiming it was all faked. That the dead kids were acting. That seems pretty far down crazy land to me. I'm not suggesting that. I also have yet to see any reports from anybody in the intel community, just Obama. I put a couple links in this thread. One showed the head of the UN inspection team who responded to the first gas attack in Syria, yes, this isn't the first Sarin attack, and she claimed that the evidence pointed toward the rebels. The second was a link to a report that the Turkish security forces captured 2kg of Sarin gas from al Qaeda rebels from Syria who were basing in southern Turkey. It's pretty silly to ignore the evidence you don't like and call people who want to see the actual evidence before we launch an attack conspiracy theorists. Pretty sure thats what Congress has been asking for, are they conspiracy theorists? Let's just see the evidence and go from there.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 10:06 AM (g1DWB)

282 Right. Intel community says Syrian army launched the rockets. Says they intercepted comms and planning.


i actually didn't know this, Flatbush Joe.

Is the actual evidence released?


The most I've seen on this was US government sources saying that the Israelis had intercepts. To the best of my knowlegde, the Israelis are being publicly silent on that issue.

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:06 AM (hO9ad)

283 Barring a verified signed, hand-written letter by Bashar Assad to a General saying " Use Sarin Gas On Civilians Now Please", what proof can there be? Does anyone think he was dumb enough to write that letter?

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:06 AM (ZshNr)

284 Methos-- and others. The problem with your original AUMF thing is-- the Obama Administration repeatedly asked Qatar and others to stay out of it because we wanted to control which rebels received aid. IOW--we said we do not want Al Qaeda to get arms or gain arms in this. Unfortunately Qatar in a sense called our bluff on that and we have had to be more involved to prevent that from happening. There is an archive of news--of the West trying to insure that. Also-- there is more than TWO sides. It's like the Balkans--or if you think there was only two sides in that--which I have actually seen that argued here btw then-- forget it.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 10:06 AM (r2PLg)

285 When it comes to if there were chem weapons used, Generalissimo Barry says definitely, here's the proof

When it comes to WHO used them ...

Well, you just have to take his word for it because you know.. Top Secret!

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:07 AM (/9IC1)

286 There's nothing in typical FAE fuels that would cause nerve agent like symptoms to present.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp


Yeah, except death by asphyxiation.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at September 01, 2013 10:07 AM (kAPuS)

287 Have we established the images of dead kids were legit? I've seen debunking of one photo of hundreds of children wrapped in sheets that claimed to be from Syria last week, by the photographer that took in Iraq a decade ago. Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 03:03 PM (hO9ad) it's a favorite trick of the palestinians too....bring out the dead kids that are photographed days later throwing rocks at the Jews......

Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at September 01, 2013 10:07 AM (8JJ6O)

288 If a sarin attack killed a thousand people, even a relatively densely packed unprepared civilian population, it was a sizable attack. We know Assad has chemical stocks and has used them in the past. We know he has rockets. I don't think there is value in trying to promote a false flag narrative, it just seems to close to birtherism and trutherism. Opposition to this has to be rooted in principle. Not process, which is how the Republicans will get stuck. And not on conspiracy theory.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 10:07 AM (NAU+F)

289 flatbush joe,

if you have any interest in writing up a post about stuff the right might be missing in its own narrative, I'd like to see it and publish it.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 10:07 AM (/IWYB)

290 Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 02:59 PM (z9HTb)

Franklin Lakes NJ?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 10:07 AM (gqgiP)

291 The most I've seen on this was US government sources saying that the Israelis had intercepts. To the best of my knowlegde, the Israelis are being publicly silent on that issue. Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 03:06 PM (hO9ad) ************ ISR weapon systems. WE have them.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 10:08 AM (r2PLg)

292 Is there anybody near the targets now besides innocents and political prisoners?

Posted by: gracepmc at September 01, 2013 10:08 AM (rznx3)

293 Post the O'Bagy article from yesterday's WSJ. That was a good one.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:08 AM (ZshNr)

294 Come on folks, it's not like Obama would lie about attacks that caused deaths

He was all honest about Benghazi, right?

Posted by: Chuck Todd at September 01, 2013 10:09 AM (/9IC1)

295 We know Saddam had weapons of mass destruction because he used them both against Iran and Halabja.  Because the libtards tied GWB in knots over what he had to do to throw a punch, Saddam had time to truck them to Syria.  That is what he did.  All thanks to the longest telegraphed punch in the history of mankind.  Now, with Syria, Barack can do any fucking thing he wants to.  Yet, he doesn't.  Why? 

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 10:10 AM (jucos)

296 >>>I had a full-blooded Australian shepherd, complete alpha male, who chased a pickup truck, and caught it. He grabbed the rear tire by his teeth and the wheel whipped him around and rolled over his head. Too bad, he was a good dog.

that's sad. he sounds like a mighty dog, brave.

sad that 100,000 years of instincts told him to "go for the legs" which is a bad instinct with a car.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 10:10 AM (/IWYB)

297 Yeah, except death by asphyxiation.

If there's no ignition, that's not gonna happen.  All the O2 that was there previously, remains there.  an ignited FAE is a different story...

Straight asphyxiation is not normally treated with atropine as these patients were.  Since the atropine was apparently working on the live ones, that suggests nerve agent rather than squib FAE

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 10:10 AM (9MLX+)

298 Purp banned me in Reno, just to watch me cry

Posted by: Pepe Loco at September 01, 2013 10:10 AM (omBWL)

299 >>> Franklin Lakes NJ? Greater Lowell MA

Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 10:10 AM (z9HTb)

300 tasker, same request, if you want to write something up on Syria.


Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 10:11 AM (/IWYB)

301 The funny thing is the 'Good Guys', in Obama's estimation, were  likely using those civilians as human shields. 

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 10:12 AM (Jgpr1)

302 272 I remember Colin Powell making the case for Iraqi WMD that partly relied upon ambiguous communication intercepts. Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 03:02 PM (/IWYB) ***************** Well we've made gains in technology. I know everyone hates drones but--- drones are primarily an invention started by the Bush Admin--and their primary function is to-- gather intel--not drone Americans sitting in a cafe in San Francisco. Now one argument can be made is that --the US media sucks and therefore you can no longer leak to them--and that's where the brits could come in handy./ Plus I see an effort to leak to more serious people--like FP.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 10:13 AM (r2PLg)

303 We know Assad has chemical stocks and has used them in the past. We know he has rockets. I don't think there is value in trying to promote a false flag narrative, ***** So where is there any proof Assad used chems?ever? Obama wants to use our air power to advance Islamist forces like they did in Libya. Why is it in our national interest to radicalize every secular ME government is the real question

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 10:13 AM (MhA4j)

304 Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 03:10 PM (9MLX+)

Aerosolized gasoline is a very nasty thing to inhale. Some of that foaming at the mouth could be attributed to it. But death comes from chemical pneumonia, and not very quickly.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 10:14 AM (gqgiP)

305 I don't believe anything this corrupt admin says.  They are all liars and scum bags.

Posted by: Vic at September 01, 2013 10:14 AM (zZbNF)

306 Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 03:06 PM (r2PLg)

I'm aware that there are multiple sides (and that this may be less a proxy war between the US and Iran as it is between Saudi Arabia and Russia). The whole thing is a mess. I've heard Gen. Keane on FNC trying to make the case that they're nowhere near Damascus, and that the local rebels are the nice ones we like.

I also have no doubt that should Assad fall and his military disintegrate the way Saddam's did the country is going to fall to the control of whoever is the bloodiest. Which I think will be AQ.

But even if that's not the case, I don't think you get away from legal treason just because there are some other people who might benefit from the action.

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:14 AM (hO9ad)

307 299 tasker, same request, if you want to write something up on Syria. Posted by: ace at September 01, 2013 03:11 PM (/IWYB) *************** Possible. I actually would have to call certain people and see if that would be.... I wouldn't be able to use my real name. I know a lot of really good people. I don't want to.....cfuk things for them.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 10:14 AM (r2PLg)

308 If Assad has used the gas in that neighborhood, don't you think he would have had the area sealed off by his troops from outsiders?

North Korea is starving its people to death, which is a long horrible way to die. I don't see Generalissimo Barry calling for an attack there

The MSM is also rather mum about the atrocities being committed by the "rebels"

At this point, I don't give a shit even if there's video of Assad himself firing off the chem artillery. We don't have a dog in this fight, and Asshead isn't going to set off those weapons in a NY Subway platform. The "rebels" just might do just that

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:15 AM (/9IC1)

309 ISR weapon systems.

WE have them.

Posted by: tasker at September 01, 2013 03:08 PM (r2PLg)


ISR?

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:17 AM (hO9ad)

310 What we saw -a hand off to Congress and golf. What it was - a hand job in front of the mirror and a cigarette after.

Posted by: gracepmc at September 01, 2013 10:17 AM (rznx3)

311 I actually would have to call certain people and see if that would be… Do it. Pull a real Evans/Novak. (I just finished The Prince of Darkness. Recommend it.)

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at September 01, 2013 10:18 AM (CeNUw)

312 I knew the jig was in when I say Chris Matthews on his show this morning ripping off his shirt and making a head band out of it.  That was right before he killed one of his lesser known panelists with his bare hands.  I think we are going to war.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 10:18 AM (jucos)

313 sad that 100,000 years of instincts told him to "go for the legs" which is a bad instinct with a car.

That's why I tell Boo to go for the eyes!

Posted by: Minsc at September 01, 2013 10:19 AM (hO9ad)

314
If there's no ignition, that's not gonna happen. All the O2 that was there previously, remains there. an ignited FAE is a different story...

Straight asphyxiation is not normally treated with atropine as these patients were. Since the atropine was apparently working on the live ones, that suggests nerve agent rather than squib FAE

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 03:10 PM (9MLX+)


And hydrocarbon vapors are known central nervous system depressants. Kids die every year on Indian reserves in Labrador from huffing gasoline, which seems to be a popular pastime there.



I still don't see solid evidence that this was in fact a real chem-weapons attack, or that Assad was responsible. When the real one comes, it will be blindingly obvious, with entire cities depopulated.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at September 01, 2013 10:20 AM (60Q+L)

315 Before we take the MSM, Lurch's, and Obama's word for it that Assad is guilty

Remember that two of those three had "proof" that George Zimmerman murdered St Trayvon in cold blood

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:20 AM (/9IC1)

316 If we don't have a dog in this fight ( the fight to prevent the widespread use of WMDs) then why have we based our foreign policy on it for 60+ years? You want food aid, sign this no WMD's contract. You want construction aid, sign here. You need water purification experts so your country doesn't die of dysentery, sign here. If we're going to allow chemical weapon use by others, then we absolutely have to plan on using them ourselves.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:20 AM (ZshNr)

317 I find it hard to believe aerosolized gas wouldn't be ignited somehow.  In a place getting shot up there's just too many sources of ignition.  Busted light bulbs, sparking wires, toasters, auto ignitions, people lighting cigarettes, etc.

The squib FAE scenario just strikes me as straw grasping, when there's so many other much higher probability scenarios. 

After incident chem sniffs would reveal traces of squib FAE VOC's weeks after dispersal too.  Even highly volatile shit like Acetone can persist in trace quantity when used as accelerant by arsonists.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 10:20 AM (9MLX+)

318 "US intel knew Assad regime was preparing chemical attack 3 days in advance"

http://tinyurl.com/kna5kz8

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 10:21 AM (gqgiP)

319 that ass has his foot on the desk....pic at drudge.....

Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at September 01, 2013 10:21 AM (8JJ6O)

320 >>> ISR? In Soviet Russia acronym describes you!

Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 10:22 AM (z9HTb)

321 Wiki/Syria has a good synopsis. Putin is right. Obama is a monkey with a hand grenade.

Posted by: sTevo at September 01, 2013 10:22 AM (sYewh)

322 When the real one comes, it will be blindingly obvious, with entire cities depopulated.

I'm pretty convinced this was some home brew or expedient agent (ex. commercial insecticide).

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 10:23 AM (9MLX+)

323 Sick Balls, Chopper!

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 10:23 AM (Jgpr1)

324 Putin is right. Obama is a monkey with a hand grenade.

Posted by: sTevo at September 01, 2013 03:22 PM (sYewh)

______________

RAYYYYYCISSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTT

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at September 01, 2013 10:24 AM (jucos)

325 Oh, I don't want anything published. I'm just trying to figure out the specific claims being made. And what that rules out (assuming the claims are true.) I'm not obsessing about this so maybe I'm wrong or missed something.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at September 01, 2013 10:24 AM (ZPrif)

326 I'm wondering just how much influence any of the media types are going to have on this Syria stuff, or really anything else going forward, as it relates to Obama's popularity. I suspect the less they have, the less they will be willing to print the company line. It's going to get interesting, that much is for sure. I would recommend conservative media types let the lefty media types wallow in it, rather than argue with them.

Posted by: BurtTC at September 01, 2013 10:25 AM (rTWUF)

327 318 that ass has his foot on the desk....pic at drudge..... *** That can't be comfortable. He is posing in a way he thinks makes him look cool.

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 10:25 AM (VlXYw)

328

I'm pretty convinced this was some home brew or expedient agent (ex. commercial insecticide).

 

If that suffered a direct hit from artillery, how would the results be different?  Also, if they managed to scrounge up some chemical ordnance, could a direct hit on the storage facility release the agent?

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 10:25 AM (Jgpr1)

329 Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 03:23 PM (9MLX+)

Why?

As you know, WMD is a misnomer. Small quantities of modern chemical agents can be released over a small area. It's the specifics of use that matter.

Hell, I'll bet they can load a Hellfire with some chemical agents and kill just the people in one house.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 10:26 AM (gqgiP)

330 As far as an "unexploded FAE" vapor killing people, see;

http://tinyurl.com/3kt8kac

If that link FUBARS, just BING "Ethylene_oxide".

If those "victims" in the photos were exposed to SARIN (an oily liquid that must be aerosolized to be used as a "nerve gas"), they would have it on their skin and clothes. So would the people collecting the bodies and trying to treat the living.

Posted by: ChrisP at September 01, 2013 10:27 AM (oKq8i)

331 When they show pictures of Obama with the soles of his shoes showing while Obama talks to Assad we'll know Mr. Gutsy Call is in business.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 01, 2013 10:27 AM (j+lCW)

332 Syria Has Right to Respond to U.S. Threat, Minister Says

http://tinyurl.com/mwmms55

What exactly does this mean?

Posted by: ? at September 01, 2013 10:27 AM (/b8+5)

333 Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 03:25 PM (Jgpr1)

All the cool kids use binary agents. Two chemicals that are relatively benign separately, but combine to make a potent nerve agent. And they are mixed just before use.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 10:27 AM (gqgiP)

334 >>"US intel knew Assad regime was preparing chemical attack 3 days in advance" Have you read the report? It's here. http://tinyurl.com/mp6y7zp There is no more proof here than there was in Colin Powell's address at the UN before Iraq. And it wasn't enough to get the Brits to agree to go. I'd still like to see more than team Obama's summary of what the intel community said.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 10:28 AM (g1DWB)

335 3.5 more years of the Obama amateur hour sitcom. But will the advertisers buy in?

Posted by: redguy at September 01, 2013 10:30 AM (oqvI4)

336 I'm pretty convinced this was some home brew or expedient agent (ex. commercial insecticide).
Posted by: Manifesto de Purp at September 01, 2013 03:23 PM

I think it was Purp who said that you could do some pretty nasty chem warfare just with shit you could buy at Costco or Home Depot

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:30 AM (/9IC1)

337 291 Is there anybody near the targets now besides innocents and political prisoners? *** If Sean Penn were over there as a peace shield I might rethink my position.

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 10:31 AM (VlXYw)

338 It's not just the "mass casualty" part of WMD that makes them especially loathed. Nukes help power half our major cities, we inject botulism into people's faces for vanity's sake. It's the potential for those nuclear/bilogical agents to be used as weapons that will kill indiscriminately that garnered international condemnation/bans.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:31 AM (ZshNr)

339 Kerry's been an Arabist since the mid 70s when he first visited their, one of his sponsors in the mid 80s, was a Saudi banker, Ghaith Pharaon, who was part of BCCI. fronted by David Paul of Centrust fame, Ironically he was investigating BCCI at the time, while going after the Contras.

Posted by: Jeffrey Pelt at September 01, 2013 10:31 AM (Jsiw/)

340 Syria Has Right to Respond to U.S. Threat, Minister Says
http://tinyurl.com/mwmms55
What exactly does this mean?
---

If I had to guess, it means Obama is fundamentally transforming Syria from a country that has no short to medium term intention of attacking us to one that does.

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:32 AM (hO9ad)

341 Daily reminder: Axelrod is a dick.

Posted by: Yep at September 01, 2013 10:32 AM (6sqK6)

342 Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 03:28 PM (g1DWB)

Oh, I don't really buy it, but it was interesting.



Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at September 01, 2013 10:33 AM (gqgiP)

343 Where are all the NOT IN OUR NAME selfie signs?

Here's an anti-war selfie sign, but I don't think this is what the lefties have in mind ....

http://tinyurl.com/lt9tfje

Posted by: kbdabear at September 01, 2013 10:33 AM (/9IC1)

344 Ok, it wasn't Putin, it was the Deputy Premier. This must be their Joe Biden. And it was West, not Obama. But, Obama is the Western policy puppet. File this correction on page 14 in small type.

Posted by: sTevo at September 01, 2013 10:34 AM (hiMsy)

345 “It’s unacceptable that a Syrian is afraid to leave his home for fear of the U.S. threat, while an American ambassador can wander about as he pleases,” Haidar said. “It’s unacceptable that our leaders have to go into hiding to protect themselves while U.S. interests are proceeding normally.”

Seems pretty clear to me/

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:35 AM (hO9ad)

346 This post needs more  of the 'Blurred Lines' Brunette.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 10:35 AM (Jgpr1)

347

It’s unacceptable that a Syrian is afraid to leave his
home for fear of the U.S. threat, while an American ambassador
can wander about as he pleases,”

 

 

Being a ghost does have its benefits.

Posted by: Ambassador Chris Stevens at September 01, 2013 10:36 AM (Jgpr1)

348 In less than two weeks, it will be 9/11 and Obama has proven himself feckless. And this after no response to last year's 9/11 attack.

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 10:36 AM (VlXYw)

349 Anonymous Navymen don't want to fight for Al-Quaeda in a Syrian Civil War. can't say I blame them: http://tinyurl.com/mmhcyxu

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 01, 2013 10:37 AM (j+lCW)

350

I was going to demand that Ace post a funny thread instead of this Syria bullshit but then I realized I didn't have a get out of ban free card.

 

 

Posted by: Not yet banned at September 01, 2013 10:37 AM (PKRPm)

351 >>> Here's an anti-war selfie sign, but I don't think this is what the lefties have in mind .... We need to start making "Sorry" signs and practice the head-tilt of concern.

Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 10:38 AM (z9HTb)

352 Why?

A profound lack of evidence of spent mil-grade dispensers. 

Military chem weapon dispensers have very specific design characteristics that distinguish them from other splody shit.

The Assad forces would have had to get in there and completely scrub the area of spent hardware.  The rebels would have been in there first with expedient MOP suits made from tarps/duct tape rounding up said evidence and presenting it in all its glory...if it actually existed.

The lack of photographic evidence of spent dispensers is damning.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 10:39 AM (9MLX+)

353 Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't being president sort of a skilled trade.

Posted by: wattyler1381 at September 01, 2013 10:39 AM (F2Vrz)

354 Meanwhile, the Yankee Bullpen has coughed up a 3 run lead.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 10:39 AM (Jgpr1)

355
If Sean Penn were over there as a peace shield I might rethink my position.

Dozens of Code Pink protestors/human shields, dead in their hand stitched vagina suits. I'm trying hard not to find that idea funny.

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at September 01, 2013 10:40 AM (0IhFx)

356

345 This post needs more of the 'Blurred Lines' Brunette.

No, every post needs more of here.  In fact, in the risk of being banned, I demand more Blurred Lines Brunette/red head.  Fcuk this Syria bullshit.

Posted by: Not yet banned at September 01, 2013 10:40 AM (PKRPm)

357 What's with all this Syria You Guys boring ass political yammering? Doesn't anyone care about the important issues, like ripping on some dumb broad's cat paintings?

Posted by: mugiwara at September 01, 2013 10:41 AM (6BnTn)

358 As I understand it, Assad spent days blowing up the scene after the fact. And I don't think it's impossible for him to have come up with a disguised dispersal system, he's had the shit for decades.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:42 AM (ZshNr)

359 Rocket delivery of chemical agent is hard to pull off for home brew. I am not arguing that the US should attack. I am arguing that the conspiracy argument is not a winning one. Are you saying that Obama is ginning up a story so he can launch a do nothing attack on Syria? Just makes no sense. Barky walked into the red line thing by talking off the cuff. The US claimed they (we) had evidence of Syrian government chemical use in April and the administration waived it off. So why would they make something up to do something now? The President is now trying to hand responsibility to Congress, and more specifically Republicans. If they vote for an AUMF then Barky can take credit if it goes well or blame if it doesn't. If they vote no, then the next horrible thing that happens and rest assured in Syria something horrible will happen then the Republicans are blamed. Note that no part of that discussion involves what is best for the country.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 10:42 AM (NAU+F)

360 352 Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't being president sort of a skilled trade. Once upon a time maybe, not anymore.  Now, you only have to be a Senator for 2 years.

Posted by: Jon in TX at September 01, 2013 10:42 AM (PKRPm)

361 I wonder if Vladimir Putin's remarks yesterday had anything to do with President Obama's decision. From the Guardian: Vladimir Putin has rejected US intelligence claims that Bashar al-Assad's regime used chemical weapons in Syria, saying it would be "utter nonsense" for government troops to use such tactics in a war it was already winning. "That is why I am convinced that [the chemical attack] is nothing more than a provocation by those who want to drag other countries into the Syrian conflict, and who want to win the support of powerful members of the international arena, especially the United States," Putin told journalists in Vladivostok. (The Guardian, Saptarshi Ray and agencies, August 31, 2013) From the Washington Post: “I would like to address Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: Before using force in Syria, it would be good to think about future casualties,” Putin told Russian news agencies in Vladivostok during a tour of the country’s flood-stricken Far East. “Russia is urging you to think twice before making a decision on an operation in Syria,” he said. (Washington Post, article by Will England, published August 31, 2013) That last quote stays in my mind.

Posted by: Bluey Raisin at September 01, 2013 10:42 AM (Skqnh)

362

340 Daily reminder:

Axelrod is a dick.

 

Axelrod is a bigger dick than Robin Thicke.

Posted by: Jon in TX at September 01, 2013 10:43 AM (PKRPm)

363 >>> Meanwhile, the Yankee Bullpen has coughed up a 3 run lead They are playing the Sox, right? Could you please get your team to try harder? I hate sharing the subway ( and especially parking garage exits) with sports fans.

Posted by: fluffy at September 01, 2013 10:43 AM (z9HTb)

364

They are playing the Sox, right?

 

Orioles.

...and Jaba just served up hanging  slider that resulted in  a 415 footer by  Adam Jones.

Posted by: garrett at September 01, 2013 10:45 AM (Jgpr1)

365 As I understand it, Assad spent days blowing up the scene after the fact. And I don't think it's impossible for him to have come up with a disguised dispersal system, he's had the shit for decades.

I'm no expert in these things, but might one use artillery on a area where an ongoing battle was occurring?

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:45 AM (hO9ad)

366 359 352 Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't being president sort of a skilled trade.Once upon a time maybe, not anymore. Now, you only have to be a Senator for 2 years. *** Are you suggesting Obama's single ply curriculum vitas is insufficient?

Posted by: WalrusRex at September 01, 2013 10:46 AM (VlXYw)

367 Actually I think it wasn't entirely about mocking some dumb broads cat paintings. I don't know that ace would care enough to just mock some broads cat paintings. This woman is the same one he had a earlier post about- which was this: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/342993.php. This cat painter thinks it's o.k apparently for teachers to have sex with their 14 year old students.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 01, 2013 10:46 AM (j+lCW)

368 “I would like to address Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: Before using force in Syria, it would be good to think about future casualties,” Putin told Russian news agencies

That seems pretty clear, too.

Posted by: Methos at September 01, 2013 10:48 AM (hO9ad)

369 So yes, mocking her cat paintings is pretty mild for a progressive who has a screw lose to think that.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 01, 2013 10:49 AM (j+lCW)

370

365 359 352 Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't being president sort of a skilled trade.Once upon a time maybe, not anymore. Now, you only have to be a Senator for 2 years.

***

Are you suggesting Obama's single ply curriculum vitas is insufficient?

 

Why, not at all. The visual evidence of his greatness is all around us, all we have to do is look, open our eyes to new possibilities, resolve to accept the world we see, not what we wish it to be.  I mean, aren't you whistling zippety-do-dah out your asshole?

Posted by: Jon in TX at September 01, 2013 10:50 AM (PKRPm)

371 This cat painter thinks it's o.k apparently for teachers to have sex with their 14 year old students. And can publish her taxoplasmic ideas in the Washington Post. Because, DC ex-Lawyer and stuff.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at September 01, 2013 10:51 AM (CeNUw)

372

Note.... no one is talking about the NSA's Unconstitutional spying on Americans anymore...

 

No one is talking about the debt limit ceiling...

 

Benghazi?  crickets...

 

And I bet there will be an Amnesty Bill in both houses really soon.... you know... while everyone is distracted...

 

This is a false crises, that is now pulling all the Oxygen away from every other scandal... so Obama PROLONGS the issue...

 

Never let a crises go to waste...

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 10:51 AM (lZBBB)

373 Purp a rocket shell for sarin is likely just a thin skinned warhead with a burster. Yes, fairly distinctive but small shrapnel is small shrapnel. Anything big could easily be picked up, a nonpersistent agent will clear out and Ssads troops could go in and clean up the big stuff and hey, if the UN got too close they could just, you know, shoot at them to scare them off. Like they did.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 10:51 AM (NAU+F)

374 I was in Artillery, and I don't know. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. I can see a clear reason why one to would destroy evidence at a chem weapon site, not a clear reason to bomb an area for two days after everyone in it was dead.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:53 AM (ZshNr)

375 Taxoplasmic, Good one!. Yep. She's reprehensible and Wapo is contemptible to publish it. I'm not surprised but it's still contemptible.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at September 01, 2013 10:54 AM (j+lCW)

376 let's Bottom Line it: Aside from the alleged chem weapon usage, Obama is helping in Syria the same exact people who attacked our embassy in Benghazi.

Posted by: sigmund soothsayer at September 01, 2013 10:54 AM (UZeIu)

377 Stupid tablet.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:54 AM (ZshNr)

378 >>I am not arguing that the US should attack. I am arguing that the conspiracy argument is not a winning one. Are you saying that Obama is ginning up a story so he can launch a do nothing attack on Syria? Just makes no sense. Please tell me how Assad using WMD on his own people makes sense.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 10:54 AM (g1DWB)

379 The best reason for Assad to use chem weapons is to win the war, stay alive, and save his ancestral tribe from genocide. Other than that, nothing. I think he rolled the dice, counting on the international community to roll over and let him gas everyone in sight while they issue stern warnings and strongly-worded letters. So far he'd be on the winning side of that gamble.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 10:57 AM (ZshNr)

380

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 03:53 PM (ZshNr)

 

Yeah.... it would seem to me that follow on Artillery would disperse any lingering effects in the area... unless you were trying to it the responders to the strike (like terrorists in Israel, who put up a second bomb with a delay..).

 

And no matter how much you blast the area... there would still be evidence remaining... shell fragments... dispersed agent in amounts small enough to be ineffective, but large enough for detection...

 

From a Logic standpoint... it makes no sense for Assad to do this... and the Western Fear of conspiracy theories says the Insurgents didn't do it...

 

But the fact is... that we are NOT dealing with rational people over there....

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 11:00 AM (lZBBB)

381 JackStraw in April they did it and got away with it. In order to win, Assad is going to have to kill people. Gassing a neighborhood where people who support the opposition lives works for him, and what is the world going to do? Exactly what it is doing, nothing, followed by some not much. Why would Hussein have gassed his own people?

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:00 AM (NAU+F)

382 Let me get this straight. A 1000 men, woman, and children in Syria getting killed by beheading or bullets gets ignored. The systematic rape and murder of christians and people of other faiths is not worthy of a response, but 200 getting killed by gas is worthy of a missile strike? Seems a bit arbitrary. Then again so does everything else president cue card does.

Posted by: wattyler1381 at September 01, 2013 11:01 AM (F2Vrz)

383 The WH spin doctors are working overtime to fabricate anything to save face. Rather than cleaning up Obama's Syrian Turd, they're just smearing it around. It'd be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at September 01, 2013 11:01 AM (n8LUb)

384

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 03:57 PM (ZshNr)

 

Killing civilians does not do Assad any good... if he was going to use Chem weapons, there are a lot more important military targets to use them on....

 

Unless he had info the Insurgents were massing for an attack in that neighborhood... it makes no military sense....

 

As the political downside is HUGE... the gain would have to be large...

 

Which... sitting here in America... I don't see....

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 11:03 AM (lZBBB)

385 Because Saddam didn't consider the Kurds his own people, and they were allied with the Iranians, at the time. Now three months ago when Bashir was on the defensive, or nearly a year ago, when they shelled the same neighborhoods it would have made more sense,

Posted by: Jeffrey Pelt at September 01, 2013 11:03 AM (Jsiw/)

386 Are you saying that Obama is ginning up a story so he can launch a do nothing attack on Syria? Just makes no sense.

Posted by: blaster


No, the ultimate point for the skepticism is the glaring fact that the US's intel credibility is approximately 0.00.  We haven't overcome that just by electing a man "who doesn't, uh-uh-uh, look like other presidentsˢˢˢˢ."

Jumping into another conflict that doesn't directly affect the US doesn't do wonders for our influence. Jumping into it without 100% verifiable evidence - even less wondrous.

There will be a push-back against the US's hyperpower flexing if we continue down this road. For all of Bush's flaws, he was able to get things done internationally. Obama has steered the ship of State toward a cliff.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at September 01, 2013 11:03 AM (kAPuS)

387 The Bamster is, in my humble opinion, the most utterly worthless elected head if state anywhere in at least 100 years. Name a worse one.

Posted by: Northernlurker at September 01, 2013 11:04 AM (4MIsr)

388 Yes 100k killed so far has been ignored. That is what the whole red line stuff was about. Barky was justifying ignoring the deaths up to that point. Hey, go ahead, kill people, but don't use chemical weapons, then I will have to get involved. Thinking that his words meant stuff, because hey, he can reverse the tides with his speech. And guess what, Assad blew off a President whose middle name was Hussein.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:04 AM (NAU+F)

389 The rebels are begging for, and receiving, foreign aid, what advantage to them by using chemical weapons?

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 11:06 AM (ZshNr)

390 Are you kidding that killing civilians doesn't do Assad any good? Why has he killed tens of thousands already? Because he has to kill people to hold on to power It's kind of what ruthless dictators do.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:06 AM (NAU+F)

391 Posted by: wattyler1381 at September 01, 2013 04:01 PM (F2Vrz) Maybe at least we will get the Obama definition of a just war out of this debacle? Nah, on second thought, not a chance because even though he is incompetent, he had enough legal training to obfuscate whatever meaning any mere words might have.

Posted by: Hrothgar at September 01, 2013 11:06 AM (XdnQT)

392 I tend to agree with ace and Flatbush. Those of us who have served have been possibly oversensitized by our NBC training to think that chemical agents are far more effective than they actually are. Certainly to wear MOPP suits and gas masks is a pain in the ass, so we have to scare troops into thinking that if they get one drop of VX on their skin, they will die. I think it's possible that chemical agents aren't quite as lethal or scary in application as we've been led to believe, and when employed by people who perhaps aren't totally well-trained and experienced experts, may not be very effective.

As for tracing the rockets back to the origin, we've known how to do crater analysis for more than 100 years. It basically involves a stick and a compass. Obviously the tools are better these days if you have counterbattery radar, but it's not rocket science. Especially if there were an observable rocket smoke contrail from launch (and I don't know one way or the other).

So sometimes a cigar is a cigar. The Syrians did it, unless there is some better evidence of a secret al Qaeda WMD laboratory in rebel-controlled Syria, and the means of delivery, and amazing OPSEC around a "false flag" operation. This isn't the Palestinians shooting a kid and using the photo over and over again.

Now, the endgame here should be a cease-fire of some sort, with both sides controlling what they control, and UN peacekeepers from Bangladesh. And I'm not sure launching a US missile strike advances that outcome. So it's Congress's responsibility to slow down the train. But in the end remembers the Russians, Iranians, Israelis, Turks, and wo knows who else have interests here too, and the big picture is more important than this incident, regrettable though it may be. The President should not have shot off his mouth, and now we have to walk it back in a responsible way.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at September 01, 2013 11:07 AM (JOe25)

393 336. 291 Unfortunately Mr. Penn will have to decline. His schedule is booked supporting dictators in South and Central America.

Posted by: gracepmc at September 01, 2013 11:07 AM (rznx3)

394 Seeing the situation room photos does not inspire confidence. Half the people there only showed up because they thought there going to be cookies. The other half thought it was only a drill.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at September 01, 2013 11:08 AM (n8LUb)

395

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 04:04 PM (NAU+F)

 

thinking on it a bit...

 

For Obama... this is not about Syria at all.... this is about Congress.

 

If Congress votes no.... Obama will go ahead, and attack the 'do nothing' Congress.... and use this as more reason to go ahead with his Imperial Presidency... as he can't even get Congress to agree when someone used WMDs...

 

If Congress votes yes?  Then Obama scores a political victory against his enemies in Congress.... Cruz, Paul, et al.... diminishing their power and using their No Votes to attack them with later...

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 11:10 AM (lZBBB)

396 Those of us who were explosive ordnance disposal have no illusions about the effectiveness of chemical weapons. It would take a lot to kill more than a thousand people.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:10 AM (NAU+F)

397 Saddam's uncle served in the militia, of the Vichy puppet regime, of Rashid Kailani, the son of the first Iraqi prime minister, the Assads of the Kalbiyya tribe, had no such connection, but they despised the Sunni tribesman that dominate Syria, and that melt into Anbar province, almost as much as Saddam felt about the Shia and the Kurds.

Posted by: Jeffrey Pelt at September 01, 2013 11:11 AM (Jsiw/)

398 The rebels are begging for, and receiving, foreign aid, what advantage to them by using chemical weapons?

Then you get the US to actively help you defeat Assad.

Posted by: Manifesto de Purp[/i][/b][/u][/s] at September 01, 2013 11:13 AM (9MLX+)

399

393 Seeing the situation room photos does not inspire confidence. Half the people there only showed up because they thought there going to be cookies. The other half thought it was only a drill.

 

***

I was led to believe there would be punch and pie.

Posted by: Eric Cartman at September 01, 2013 11:14 AM (PKRPm)

400 Romeo13 that is exactly what I am saying. It is about Congress not Syria. If they vote no he will not fire the missiles anyway. UNLESS. Syria launches another chem attack. Then he will say that he was right about it after all, say Republicans are prodictator and anti children, shoot a few missiles and hit the links. If they vote yes - and read the Republican leaders responses, they will - then he gets a political victory and he can tell the Lefties that Republicans made him do it

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:14 AM (NAU+F)

401 388 The rebels are begging for, and receiving, foreign aid, what advantage to them by using chemical weapons?    

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 04:06 PM (ZshNr)

 

 

Thinking is that is they can fool the US Intel and blame Assad... Obama will help more.... its a Mastroyka (think I spelled it right... LOL).

 

Face it... American Intel does not have a good historical track record...

 

Heck... in the 50's and 60's we created a whole new type of Fighter, to combat against a Soviet Bomber.... which couldn't reach America, and of which only like FOUR were ever made... (which is why we went into Viet Nam with Fighters that didn't have Guns on them...).

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 11:16 AM (lZBBB)

402 So the rebels counted on a false flag to dupe the inspectors, and they risked their entire revolution on it, despite holding half of the country already? That makes no more sense to me than Assad doing it.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 11:18 AM (ZshNr)

403 391 Agreed. Now we have to unearth a few statesmen.

Posted by: gracepmc at September 01, 2013 11:19 AM (rznx3)

404 >>In order to win, Assad is going to have to kill people. Gassing a neighborhood where people who support the opposition lives works for him, and what is the world going to do? Exactly what it is doing, nothing, followed by some not much. Actually, the UN is claiming that it is likely that it was the rebels who launched that attacker earlier this year. I posted the link a couple times up thread. Do you suppose it didn't get a lot of press because it didn't fit Obama and the msm's meme? Don't forget, this is a guy who ran a presidential election last year saying al Qaeda was destroyed right as they were killing our ambassador in Libya and attacking Syria. Obama lies. A lot. I think we all agree on that. All I'm asking is to see the evidence that says we need to go to war in a way that will help our most ruthless and deadly enemy. Some pretty interesting videos from Walid Shoebat that seems to call Obama's claims into question. It also shows that the rebels do indeed have artillery and the ability to lob rockets. http://tinyurl.com/kwsx4nt

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 11:19 AM (g1DWB)

405

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 04:18 PM (ZshNr)

 

You have to remember that the rebels are not a coherent group...

 

You have the Free Syrian Army.... and then the Jihadists from other Nations...

 

Do you think the Jihadists would hesitate to kill people from another tribe?

 

Hmm... interesting question... the neighborhood Gas'd... which tribe and sect of Islam was that neighborhood?

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 11:21 AM (lZBBB)

406 391 Being a combat vet myself I agree with your assessment of chem weapons. We all remember the tear gas room in bootcamp. But I find beheading a far more egregious act worthy of a more aggressive response.

Posted by: wattyler1381 at September 01, 2013 11:22 AM (F2Vrz)

407 Here is thing about the evidence argument. Suppose the evidence is shown to you? Do you then support the President, or not?

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:23 AM (NAU+F)

408 But I find beheading a far more egregious act worthy of a more aggressive response.

 

 

Posted by: wattyler1381 at September 01, 2013 04:22 PM (F2Vrz)

 

Yeah... and the eating of body parts?  Of which there is copious amounts of video????

 

We are not dealing with people the West would consider civilized...

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 11:26 AM (lZBBB)

409 It's all speculation. My Occam's antenna says it was Assad, others see it differently. But you can't buy into one UN assessment and then dismiss others just because they don't fit a pattern you'd recognize.

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 11:30 AM (ZshNr)

410 Here is thing about the evidence argument. Suppose the evidence is shown to you? Do you then support the President, or not? *** Then arrest the fucker and take him to The International Criminal Court. Don't be responsible for more Syrians dead than we already are with our Al Qaeda mercenaries.

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 11:31 AM (MhA4j)

411 >>Here is thing about the evidence argument. Suppose the evidence is shown to you? Do you then support the President, or not? Emphatically no. I didn't support it when there was talk that WMD had been used in Syria previously. There is no good guy in this fight only levels of bad. But the worst case would be Assad losing and more Islamic militants taking over. But you know what, the evidence argument is bigger than that. I didn't believe that Obama was telling the truth about Benghazi and he wasn't. As I said earlier, he lies a lot. It would be nice if just once we held his feet to the fire and not let him get away with his incessant lying. I'm old fashion that way. I think as a minimum requirement our CinC should tell the truth.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 11:32 AM (g1DWB)

412 A fuller question would be, do you consider our efforts at WMD containment to be fruitless and should we end them?

Posted by: Lincolntf at September 01, 2013 11:33 AM (ZshNr)

413 Beto what color is the sky in your world? Not gonna happen, not how it works. Personally I don't think we have a dog in the fight. If bad people gas themselves that is a bad thing, it does not require US intervention. If they have chemical weapons and show a tendency toward use against the US or giving it to terrorists who would use against the US then blow their shit up.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:34 AM (NAU+F)

414 406 Evidence? Real or fabricated. Given this presidents track record, why would I trust anything he says or does. That, sir is not my fault it's his. Also, the people we kill are very real, but most importantly to what fucking end. War isn't recreation...it isn't sport....hhhhhheeeeelllllloooooo So, to answer your question. Hell fucking NO!

Posted by: wattyler1381 at September 01, 2013 11:37 AM (F2Vrz)

415 JackStraw if the evidence would not change your mind then the evidence argument is a straw man. So to speak. Because if you lay out your opposition as based on incomplete evidence and that gets completed - and don't believe for a moment it couldn't be - then you have no objection. That means you have to change your argument, and that just looks opportunist. Because if they made up shit to this point, wouldn't they just make up more?

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:37 AM (NAU+F)

416 For the next week, Putin and Assad and all our pseudo allies will be pushing our face in the dirt. It ain't gonna be pretty.

Posted by: PJ at September 01, 2013 11:42 AM (ZWaLo)

417 A fuller question would be, do you consider our efforts at WMD containment to be fruitless and should we end them? **** The US is signed to and bound by the Chemical Weapons Convention but it is only the signers job to police each other. Not to police non-signatories. All they can do to them is sanctions.

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 11:50 AM (MhA4j)

418 If your argument is I am against Syrian intervention is because its Obama, you might as well take up making giant paper mâché heads. That's lefty thinking. I will have no truck with it.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 11:56 AM (NAU+F)

419 >>JackStraw if the evidence would not change your mind then the evidence argument is a straw man. >>So to speak. I see what you did there. But no, it's not. I don't have a vote. Congress does. I'd like to see the evidence, all of it, including who is fighting in Syria laid our for all to see and then let's see what happens.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 12:00 PM (g1DWB)

420 When will Obama answer Boehner's sixteen questions concerning the military strike against Assad??? Anyone...anyone... Bueller....Bueller...

Posted by: Steven Tyler at September 01, 2013 12:01 PM (7oPje)

421 But Congress will be shown the evidence. So what if what they see convinces them? Will you then support the President? You already said no. So the argument is just a facade. The President could say there are those who will oppose me regardless, whether I am right or wrong, and dismiss the criticism. Which he will.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 12:03 PM (NAU+F)

422 >>But Congress will be shown the evidence. So what if what they see convinces them? You have a lot more faith than I do that Obama will in fact show all of the evidence instead of just the evidence that supports his position. Hell, I've posted many links on this thread that show that the rebels have already been caught with Sarin. I posted a video with them shooting artillery and talking about Sarin. I've posted links showing the Syrian government turning over chemicals they claim to have taken from the rebels with Saudi markings. Is it all true? Don't know. Point is nobody knows right now and both the Brits, the Germans and every other NATO member save for France has already seen the evidence and said they aren't doing squat. Nobody is denying that Sarin was used, but nobody, including Team Obama, claims they have absolute proof that it was indeed Assad did launch the attack. I think Obama is a dangerous liar who will do whatever he wants to push his agenda which is distinctly not in our interest. And yes, that includes framing evidence in a way that builds his case. As you said, Obama has already said he has the right to launch the attack no matter what Congress says so who is being disingenuous?

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 12:10 PM (g1DWB)

423

Axelrod's purely political - meaning purely irresponsible, unserious, and inappropriate - approach to things is not new, ace (as you of course knew).  But I do recall how shocked and disgusted I was (and remain, all these years later) when I first encountered this sort of despicable idiocy in DC, regarding national security issues, when I worked on the Hill. 

 

It was then primarily a behavior seen with liberal Dems (surprise!).  And it was shameful, unbelievable, and of course has NOT resulted in any electoral damage to Dems, ever (outside the 2002 mid-terms).  Part of the dumbing down of the nation into an unserious one.  Towards the end of WWII, there was much grumbling and unease over casualty counts in the Pacific - but that was completely understandable, not unserious, and not irresponsible - the butcher's bill was mounting (recall that in the entire war, March 1945 was the high-point for US KIA numbers - not a bit of trivia that many people will guess correctly) with Iwo and Okinawa to levels not seen since the Civil War.

 

I recall the actual day the Democratic Party, and especially its liberals (not then as radical or as dominant as now), ceased to be a responsible national security party.  January 12, 1991.  The Gulf War resolution passed, barely, in the Senate.  Against a back-drop of a strong bipartisan House vote, the most naked and consequential aggression by a dangerous dictatorship since the 1930s, a prolonged period of diplomatic and UN-centric dilly-dallying to give every chance for other solutions, and nearly universal international backing of varying degrees for reversing the aggression which even took the form of a large coalition. 

 

Two good friends who worked for Senate Dems - and who had long barely tolerated the idiocy then gaining dominance in their party (wanna hear how the most recent Dep Secretary of Defense had to have the utility of aircraft carriers explained to him back then when he was an affable but lightweight aide to Ted Kennedy?) - also saw this as the final straw.  Both left the field, and the party, shortly after.

 

At the time, during the earlier Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the topic, I had suggested the line that "the only victory Saddam could ever win in this campaign would be in the US Senate" - of course my friend didn't get his senator to use it, but it caused a stir on the staff level, with many Dem staff basically agreeing.

 

 

 

Posted by: non-purist at September 01, 2013 12:14 PM (afQnV)

424 Oh, please, don't try to say I am backing Obama. I am saying that your argument is that the evidence doesn't matter, you are going to oppose anyway. If the evidence doesn't matter, then why would you argue as if it does? I do not think that Obama wants to attack Syria. I think he is looking for a way out of his own mouth-footing. And if that way out gives him a mechanism to make the Republicans look bad, then of course he will do it. But Dems made the evidence argument against Bush in Iraq, he showed then the evidence and then they voted for it, and later after it got unpopular they claimed it was cherry picked or whatever. Screw that game. Read what I wrote above. If there is no national security interest, then we should not act with national security assets.

Posted by: blaster at September 01, 2013 12:16 PM (NAU+F)

425 blaster There is no national security interest in bombing Syria. Zero. Nada. It will also open up a lot of possibly bad scenarios for Israel. Assad, who is a murderous lunatic, should be allowed to kill as many Al-Quaeda backed assholes as he can. Keep the WMDs away from the Rebels is a good plan. Who's killing and beheading Christians? Do we want Al-Quaeda to control tons of sarin and eve worse chemical weapons? That is our security interest, along with putting a boot in this administrations ass.

Posted by: TexasJew at September 01, 2013 12:24 PM (6+4TJ)

426

Oh, just to muddy the waters - or actually not, for those who by nature take the exact anti-Axelrod approach to foreign policy, as I do - how about the following propositions:

* the president would be well within his constitutional limits to launch punitive strikes on Syria without express congressional approval; it would be ill-advised, and counter to the best and most successful style of leadership, but it would not be unconstitutional, nor in any way an impeachable offense; the fact that he has outrageously ignored congress in Libya and elsewhere and gotten away with no political damage is the same reason he gets away with all his disasters (some of which ARE unconstitutional!), and the same reason you've ever heard his name - a dumbed-down, unserious nation with a mostly collapsed civic culture and race-obsession is acting out its worst pathologies via elections and "governance"

 

*  it is possible for there to be foreign policy situations that will go south for our interests, whether you have a ridiculously unfit crew (the current administration, Carter, Clinton admins. for the most part) or a highly competent one (Bush I on the Gulf War, Dubya post-9/11 on most of the big questions up until about 2008 on Iraq, and the still-mysterious disastrous reversal on North Korea); Carter badly mishandled Iran, but didn't cause/create the basic dynamics or events - just as Bambi grossly mishandled Egypt, but didn't cause the collapse of what was a tired and failing semi-dynastic authoritarian operation in the Mubarrak regime

 

* any LIKELY US action in Syria will, probably, not materially affect anything of interest - US "credibility", the outcome of the Syrian conflict, the likelihood of the use of CW by other dictatorships, none of it.  So go ahead, do it, or don't do it.  Whatever.  It's almost certainly of importance only to overly academic pencil-twisters in the commentariat. 

 

So the SCOAMF/T is definitely and always has been those two things - but it's important to distinguish between that and the actual impact that US policy has on the real world, which is often limited regardless of how brilliant or how bumbling.

 

 

 

 

Posted by: non-purist at September 01, 2013 12:27 PM (afQnV)

427 >>Oh, please, don't try to say I am backing Obama. I am saying that your argument is that the evidence doesn't matter, you are going to oppose anyway. >>If the evidence doesn't matter, then why would you argue as if it does? I didn't say you were being backing Obama. I said that Obama is being completely disingenuous and trying to sell Congress and the nation on going to war, a war which will help one of our most direct enemies, without giving all of the information. I'm not the person that needs to be convinced. Neither are you. We have our minds made up. But 90% of the country doesn't pay much attention to this stuff and Congress deserves all of the evidence and no, I do not believe he is giving that. Why would I believe it? When has he ever done that? He had no problem leaving 4 Americans to do at the hands of terrorists and then threw down the power of the US government to go after a stupid film maker that he knew had nothing to do with the attack. You can claim its a leftist game all you want but this president has a history of lying to the public, F&F, the IRS, Benghazi, etc., etc. and I do not trust him. If thats a leftist game to you then so be it.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 12:38 PM (g1DWB)

428 PS. If I'm a conspiracy theorist then so is John Bolton. He just said that there is no doubt that Sarin was used but there is an open question as to who used it. I'm ok being on the same team as Bolton.

Posted by: JackStraw at September 01, 2013 12:46 PM (g1DWB)

429
Probably been said but Obama is doing what he always did by punting in to congress, voting present.  He wants no association with anything until after the fact that it is viewed as a good, then he wants credit.  (and hey gotta say it worked for him, then again it also makes him a pussy).

Secondly, I thought it quite funny that he backed down after a 10 year old boy taunted him on facebook.  How far we have fallen though.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at September 01, 2013 01:01 PM (lnFK0)

430 So all the Libyans we killed in their sleep bombing residential neighborhoods to advance the Islamic Armies of Saudi Arabia deserve no less?

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 01:04 PM (MhA4j)

431 The part of the intel community who would know who did what to whom in this matter would be the NSA. Just FYI.

Posted by: baldilocks at September 01, 2013 01:04 PM (Tnlh/)

432 ...Bolton.."there is no doubt that Sarin was used but there is an open question as to who used it. " *** When you've lost Bolton....

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 01:06 PM (MhA4j)

433 Some one pointed out, Iraq was not the only country that had storehouses of chemical weapons, Libya had something in the neighborhood of 6500 tons of the stuff.

Posted by: Jeffrey Pelt at September 01, 2013 01:41 PM (Jsiw/)

434 Don't know if anyone's mentioned this before, but John Kerry is looking more and more like Mickey Rourke in Sin City every time I see his picture.

Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 01, 2013 01:49 PM (29vnO)

435 433 Well, when you have to keep sewing the parts back on...

Posted by: Beto at September 01, 2013 01:53 PM (MhA4j)

436 Our President is dishonest and he's a pussy. Those two character traits pretty much explain everything this Administration has done or failed to do, Syria included.

Posted by: MoeRon at September 01, 2013 02:01 PM (p24iy)

437 fuck, all the threads are dead, except the gaming thread and I don't wanna go over and piss on their cornflakes.  srsly, what's a girl to do?

Posted by: Peaches at September 01, 2013 02:05 PM (8lmkt)

438

Posted by: baldilocks at September 01, 2013 06:04 PM (Tnlh/)

 

Only if they used communication systems that we have broken... and happened to be listening to.

 

Written orders not transmitted?  or a Code we don't have?

 

There is no substitute for Human Intelligence (using the spy definition).

Posted by: Romeo13 at September 01, 2013 02:25 PM (lZBBB)

439 (Is it safe?)

Posted by: Jones in CO at September 01, 2013 02:27 PM (8sCoq)

440 "...with Obama punting to Congress,..."

Uh huh. And if Congress votes no, it won't be Congress with the egg on their faces, it'll be Obie, the Big Bluster himself. After all, it was HE, and not Congress, yapping about some sort of red line.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at September 01, 2013 03:10 PM (ItfcE)

441 Maybe bait to elicit a military response from us. We strike Syria and they retaliate with Chinese anti ship missiles provided by Iran and disable or sink a number of the ships deployed to the area. Russia moves into Syria and we either turn tail or engage in WW III. Israel is isolated, US is pushed out of the eastern Mediterranean, and the caliphate led by Iran takes hold. Syria calls on the UN to sanction the US aggression and only a US veto in the Security Council will stand in the way. The only roadblock is Israel's nukes and their willingness to employ them.

Posted by: Agitator at September 01, 2013 05:15 PM (u36rj)

442 ...no one in the place, except you and me....

Posted by: Quarter to three... at September 01, 2013 06:01 PM (MMC8r)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
301kb generated in CPU 0.37, elapsed 1.4964 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.2045 seconds, 678 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.