Here are the first two paragraphs of the report by the Washington Post which sets forth today's official leak of information about the American response to the Syrian use of chemical weapons:
President Obama is weighing a military strike against Syria that would be of limited scope and duration, designed to serve as punishment for Syria’s use of chemical weapons and as a deterrent, while keeping the United States out of deeper involvement in that country’s civil war, according to senior administration officials.
The timing of such an attack, which would probably last no more than two days and involve sea-launched cruise missiles — or, possibly, long-range bombers — striking military targets not directly related to Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, would be dependent on three factors: completion of an intelligence report assessing Syrian government culpability in last week’s alleged chemical attack; ongoing consultation with allies and Congress; and determination of a justification under international law.
The nonsense level of this leak is pretty high. The attack has to await completion of an intelligence report? Really? Yesterday, America announced that it had concluded that the Assad forces made a massive chemical strike. Now we are waiting for paper work? Even worse, Secretary of Defense Hagel was quoted in other stories today as saying that the intelligence agencies would "soon conclude" that the Assad forces used chemical weapons. Only in Obama's Washington could the government announce in advance the conclusion to be reached by the CIA.
The determination of a justification under international law is similarly mumbo-jumbo that makes no sense. There is no question that Syria's chemical attack violated international treaties regarding the prohibition of such weapons that date back to the 1920's; I wrote about this yesterday. We also know that there will not be any vote of the UN Security Council to sanction an attack on Syria. What other justification can there be?
The pre-announcement of the nature, target and duration of the upcoming attack is the worst of all. Syria probably will not be able to defend well against this attack, but why in the world are we giving Assad a road map as to where to concentrate his defense. Does the Obama administration want to see American bombers shot down? Will there be a missile attack on our destroyers? There is no need for America or the world to be told in advance exactly what the attack will be.
Beyond today's leak, there is also a wider set of talking points that the administration has put out for its flacks in the media. The main item is that America has to act to this violation of the red line set by Obama or our influence in the world will be harmed. Who came up with that line? This is at least the third chemical attack by the Assad forces that the USA and many other countries have confirmed. Obama basically ignored the first two attacks. Why is the third time the charm?
Obviously, anyone who reads this blog knows that I strongly support taking action against the Assad regime. The American response need not be long term, but it has to be strong enough to really hurt the Assad forces. Fifty cruise missiles over two days won't do that. Even more important, though, someone in Obama's Washington has to start to understand that BS on an international level just does not get the job done. No one should be leaking important information that can inform our enemies of our intentions. Any idiot knows that, but, I guess that the Obama administration is not made up of just any idiots.
President Obama is weighing a military strike against Syria that would be of limited scope and duration, designed to serve as punishment for Syria’s use of chemical weapons and as a deterrent, while keeping the United States out of deeper involvement in that country’s civil war, according to senior administration officials.
The timing of such an attack, which would probably last no more than two days and involve sea-launched cruise missiles — or, possibly, long-range bombers — striking military targets not directly related to Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, would be dependent on three factors: completion of an intelligence report assessing Syrian government culpability in last week’s alleged chemical attack; ongoing consultation with allies and Congress; and determination of a justification under international law.
The nonsense level of this leak is pretty high. The attack has to await completion of an intelligence report? Really? Yesterday, America announced that it had concluded that the Assad forces made a massive chemical strike. Now we are waiting for paper work? Even worse, Secretary of Defense Hagel was quoted in other stories today as saying that the intelligence agencies would "soon conclude" that the Assad forces used chemical weapons. Only in Obama's Washington could the government announce in advance the conclusion to be reached by the CIA.
The determination of a justification under international law is similarly mumbo-jumbo that makes no sense. There is no question that Syria's chemical attack violated international treaties regarding the prohibition of such weapons that date back to the 1920's; I wrote about this yesterday. We also know that there will not be any vote of the UN Security Council to sanction an attack on Syria. What other justification can there be?
The pre-announcement of the nature, target and duration of the upcoming attack is the worst of all. Syria probably will not be able to defend well against this attack, but why in the world are we giving Assad a road map as to where to concentrate his defense. Does the Obama administration want to see American bombers shot down? Will there be a missile attack on our destroyers? There is no need for America or the world to be told in advance exactly what the attack will be.
Beyond today's leak, there is also a wider set of talking points that the administration has put out for its flacks in the media. The main item is that America has to act to this violation of the red line set by Obama or our influence in the world will be harmed. Who came up with that line? This is at least the third chemical attack by the Assad forces that the USA and many other countries have confirmed. Obama basically ignored the first two attacks. Why is the third time the charm?
Obviously, anyone who reads this blog knows that I strongly support taking action against the Assad regime. The American response need not be long term, but it has to be strong enough to really hurt the Assad forces. Fifty cruise missiles over two days won't do that. Even more important, though, someone in Obama's Washington has to start to understand that BS on an international level just does not get the job done. No one should be leaking important information that can inform our enemies of our intentions. Any idiot knows that, but, I guess that the Obama administration is not made up of just any idiots.
No comments:
Post a Comment