(Pat Oliphant via GoComics.com)
If it’s true that “The government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday said it welcomed a Russian proposal to avert U.S. military strikes by having Damascus turn over control of its chemical weapons to international monitors”, and that “the United States ‘would welcome a decision and action by Syria to give up its chemical weapons’” , then more power to the diplomats.
In the interim, in case your blood pressure is not as high as you would like, here’s a little gift from Mark Ames at NSFWCorp:
Q: Is Putin Really Planning To Bomb Saudi Arabia?
(A: In 2008, Cheney Really Did Plan To Bomb Russia)One of the wildest rumors about the Syria War going around last week claimed that Vladimir Putin ordered Russia’s military chiefs to draw up plans for a full-scale military attack on Saudi Arabia if US-led forces bomb Syria…
Last month was the fifth anniversary of that war in Georgia. Most people in the West have forgotten about it by now, but it’s a good time to refresh your memories. Western media and political leaders got that war completely wrong, blaming it on an allegedly aggressive, imperialist Russia out to “punish” Georgia for the crime of being a “Jeffersonian democracy” in Russia’s backyard, as Georgia’s spindoctors put it. What’s even more frightening is how that war, misreported and mischaracterized as Russian aggression, brought us dangerously close to World War Three.
A couple of years after the Georgia War ended, it emerged that Vice President Dick Cheney and “several senior White House staffers” had wanted to start a war with Russia to stop their counter-offensive against Georgia. Cheney’s idea had been to launch “surgical strikes” and/or to bomb Russian land forces using the Roki Tunnel, the only land link between Russia and South Ossetia, thousands of feet up in the Caucasus mountains…
This false framing almost allowed Bush Administration neocons to drag America into a war with nuclear-armed Russia. On August 10, 2008, just as Russian forces were pouring through the Roki Tunnel to push Georgian troops out of South Ossetia, American military C-130 transport planes were ferrying hundreds of US-trained Georgian soldiers and heavy equipment out of Iraq — where they had served as a loyal backup contingent for Bush, the third largest after the US and Britain — and into battle against Russian and Ossetian forces. That alone could’ve sparked war with Russia. Imagine if Russians started ferrying hundreds of Taliban fighters and heavy armor into Afghanistan to fight US troops…
Luckily for the rest of us, Bush’s neocon national security advisor Stephen Hadley retained enough sense to realize that the Russians would respond militarily to any “surgical strike,” and that would be the end of everyone’s retirement golfing plans. Knowing how Cheney works on the sly, Hadley decided that the only way to stop him and the other neocon loons was to make Cheney’s plans known to Bush, and to force Bush to take a clear position on war with Russia…
Now imagine if we’d launched “surgical strikes” against Russia, sparking World War Three, over a war that we’d completely fucked up and got bass-ackwards, a war that the New York Times and the EU admitted they had flubbed. Not only would we be hairless, toothless, wheezing and generally dead, but we’d also feel pretty goddamn stupid.
So when the same French intelligence source who correctly called the 2008 Georgia-Russia war tells me today that Putin ordered Russian forces to prepare for a full-scale attack on Saudi Arabia in the event of US bombings, I’m not inclined to dismiss it. I’m more inclined to find out why that rumor is out there, and what makes it plausible, aside from the general rule that anything awful is plausible in war, and aside from the fact that two of the main figures in the Georgia war — Putin and John McCain — are still around. (Recall that in an interview after the Georgia war, Putin blamed the McCain campaign for starting the war to help the McCain campaign’s election bid, which isn’t as crazy as it sounds. As I said, McCain’s top foreign policy advisor, Randy Scheunemann, was also Mikheil Saakashvili’s top US lobbyist and close advisor; Saakashvili wouldn’t dare launch a war without at least some support from powerful Republicans.)
This brings me to the most obvious question: Why would Putin bomb Saudi Arabia? And a more serious question: What makes that rumor even remotely credible, bizarre as that may sound?
The answer involves a little-reported meeting between Putin and Saudi Arabia’s powerful intelligence chief, Prince Bandar, on July 31 of this year. The Saudis and Bandar are the main backers of the Syrian opposition forces fighting against Bashir al-Assad’s army. The Saudis back the whole range of opposition forces, including the Al Qaeda-linked al-Nusra jihadis, who are among the best fighters — maybe the opposition’s only real fighters. Putin and Russia are the biggest backers of Assad’s regime. So Prince Bandar came to Moscow on July 31 to try to hammer out a deal, but the details of that meeting remained a tightly held secret until a week later, when a story broke in Reuters claiming that Bandar had offered Russia huge incentives to pull support for Assad and allow the opposition forces to take over…
After a few days of silence, the Kremlin issued a terse response that no deal had been agreed to. A couple of weeks after that, towards the end of August, more details about the Putin-Bandar meeting emerged that explained the Russians’ behavior: According to these later accounts, Prince Bandar’s “carrots” came with some implicit-explicit threats. He promised that a Sunni-led Syrian government would not allow the jihadi radicals into power, and he reportedly also promised that Saudi Arabia would make sure that the Chechen and North Caucasus jihadis currently fighting in Syria with the Al Qaeda-linked outfit al-Nusra would not return to Russia after the war’s end. Bandar went further, reportedly promising that the Saudis would use their influence (financial and otherwise) over radical Islamic fighters in Chechnya, Dagestan and other Russian regions to make sure no terrorist attacks would ruin the 2014 Sochi Olympics.
According to these later reports, Prince Bandar’s implicit threat — that if Russia did not agree to abandon Assad, Chechen radicals would create problems in next year’s Olympics — was not lost on Putin…
It was in the aftermath of these leaked reports that new rumors sprouted up last week alleging that Putin was so outraged over Prince Bandar’s threat-by-admission that he ordered the Russian military to draw up plans to strike Saudi Arabia in response to a Saudi-influenced US military strike on Syria.
With that context in mind, the rumor doesn’t seem so completely wild after all, even though I still don’t buy it.For one thing, just as Russia would’ve been willing to go nuclear over South Ossetia, I’m pretty sure the US would be willing to send everyone to Hell, us included, to protect the oil fields in Saudi Arabia. Even that pacifist Jimmy Carter established the “Carter Doctrine” promising the End Times to any outsiders who mess with the Gulf sheikhs…
The other thing to come out of that Putin-Bandar meeting and the offers made was Syria’s strategic importance to Russia. The Russians have lost most of their allies in the Arab world; Assad is pretty much the last one. With Assad, they have a Mediterranean port for their naval fleet, a reliable weapons client, and longtime personal relationships. Assad has also said he won’t allow Qatar to build its vaunted natural gas pipeline through Syria and Turkey to supply the European Union. If it were allowed to go ahead, the pipeline would end Russia’s gas monopoly over Europe, and with it, Russia’s geopolitical leverage. The Saudis promised Putin that if their proxies take control of Syria, they’d make sure that Russia’s natural gas dominance would be preserved, and Qatar wouldn’t build its gas pipeline through Syria.
This coming from the same guy who admitted Saudis have the power to turn Chechen terrorism on or off at will — an amazing admission considering the Russia-Chechen wars have killed tens of thousands of people. Putin could be excused for questioning the reliability of the offer. As Andrei Soldatov of Agentura.ru put it: “In general it takes years for the Saudis to keep their promises.” If and when Assad falls, it could mean a lot of things for Russia and Putin: Total irrelevance in the Arab world, an end to Russia’s dominance of natural gas markets, humiliation and anger from the siloviki, and around the corner, a 2014 Olympics whose success or failure depends on Saudi and Qatari influence over jihadis based in North Caucasus. Meanwhile, inside of Russia, Putin’s hold on power has never been weaker, his popularity never lower, and his paranoia has been making him increasingly eccentric, which is a little jarring coming from someone as cool, sober and controlled as Putin used to be….
Much more paranoia at the link, for the next 48 hours, or you could pay three bucks for the monthly NSFWCorps subscription.
russell
Pretty much everything you need to know about the Bush years is packed into that sentence fragment.
srv
I’m sure that’s enough runway for Vlad and the UN
Well, we’ll see about that last part. Someone in Congress should call those folks in for a non-Clapper briefing.
dollared
@russell: Thanks. It is really weird how much anger, shame and outrage wells up in me as I read that little quote and your pithy summary.
Cheney really is the worst person this country has produced in at least half a century.
RP
Classic Oliphant — brilliant artist, terrible political cartoonist.
srv
Ah, now it makes sense. That Qatari Emir is a sneaky fellow.
lamh36
So the Syrian government is taking it’s case to the Congress.
This whole bidness is a mess. Congress should voter yay or nay based on the what the evidence given by the US gov. If it’s not strong enough, great, vote nay, if you think it’s strong enough, but your constituents say no…voter nay, if you beleive it is enough, vote yay.
Am I the only one who believes that assurances by Assad should mean diddly squat?
READ: Here’s What The Syrian Government Is Telling Congress
RP
This is the apotheosis of passive-aggressive sniping.
Chris
Even before reading the rest, it seems obvious – the Saudis have been the primary backers of jihadi groups that have been killing Russians and their allies for decades, long before they ever turned their sights on the West. They’re to Russia what Syria or Iran are to America. Just look at how often we threaten to bomb these places.
kindness
Why would Putin bomb Saudi Arabia?
The IRS, Bhengazi and the Kenyan Muslim Userper. That’s all Fox needs. Why treat Russia differently?
sherparick
@dollared: I would say since at least since Jefferson Davis and William Lowndes Yancey.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lowndes_Yancey
KG
What’s the benefit in bombing Saudi Arabia? I really don’t see it, other than as a proxy to get the US to strike Russia? I’m just not seeing how this ends well for Russia
Hawes
I have been a bit shaken by the reflexive belief in Left Blogsylvania that the government always lies us into war, therefore they are lying us into Syria.
But I reflexive believe that Putin is capable of some crazy shit if he feels desperate enough.
srv
Putin’s only lever is to scare the gas hungry EU.
We should ask the Chinese to come in and clean up this mess, just like the last.
Exxon is selling some of its interests to Petro China too.
They’d get that pipeline built PDQ.
Also too, if you never watch RT, you wouldn’t know they’ve been all gold buggery for the last few months on the US dollar. Clearly, gold prices have been putting some butt-hurt on Vlad.
Mike in NC
Funny how the warmongering idiot John McCain’s comment on how “We are all Georgians now” was largely ignored by the Villagers back in 2004.
Cacti
@dollared:
The word gets thrown around a lot, but I think Cheney was/is an honest to FSM sociopath.
Mandalay
John Kerry today on the nature of US intervention in Syria…
Of course, if he is proposing an “unbelievably small” intervention, that invites others to ask why we should bother at all. The vote in Congress is now a giant turd swirling around the bowl, and “peacemaker” Putin has played the Administration like a cheap banjo.
I don’t know what the hell has happened to Kerry. It’s sad. He has become an irrational warmonger, and is constantly dropping gaffes. He just doesn’t seem up to being SoS.
Chris
@dollared:
It really is terrifying to realize that Bush was the saner and more responsible one of the pair. According to this and some other sources, at least.
srv
@Cacti: Cheney was an Iranian agent. Whether he knows it or not, IDK.
The KSA currently has the most agents/adherents in the Executive Branch.
ruemara
@Mandalay: You seriously see this as Putin playing the US? Odd how no one else is seeing this your way.
Mandalay
@Chris:
Cheney is one of those Beltway figures who is accorded “gravitas” by the MSM even though – apart from all his other failings – he was demonstrably dumb as a box of rocks. Washington is full of them: Larry Summers, Alan Greenspan, Newt Gingrich, George Will, Paul Ryan…
They are all ambitious and dishonest egomaniacs, but they are also shown to be really dim when you scrutinize their careers and achievements. Yet still the MSM fawns on them all as though they are intellectual heavyweights.
Anoniminous
Snorting coke several times a day since 1987.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
Willful stupidity is the flavor of the season I see – The correct question is why Putin is threatening to bomb Saudi Arabia the same time the US Congress is voting to bomb Syria. But hey, I guess the answer so obvious you can’t sound like a Serious Person for asking it that way. Poor Putin, hapless victim of American aggression is a better narrative, eh?
And oh yes, Syria is lobbying the House to vote against the resolution. Nice to see our representatives have such an open door policy.
Roger Moore
Because Russia is a major petroleum exporter. Attacking Saudi Arabia would disrupt worldwide petroleum markets, drive prices through the roof, and make Russia a ton of money.
Jeremy
I’m sure Cheney came up with some stupid ideas and thank god Bush was one of the saner people in the administration.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
Any chance that he is playing a role? In diplomacy? Like as a part of his job?
No, he must be an incompetent and irrational warmonger. Christ.
geg6
@RP:
Seriously. It’s almost like somebody wants there to be an air strike just so she could scream bloody murder about Obama being a bloody murderer.
Anoniminous
@Mandalay:
My thesis is compared to the average MSM journalist and OpEd writer “Larry Summers, Alan Greenspan, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan …” are “intellectual heavyweights.”
Mnemosyne
@ruemara:
No kidding. It’s like, Kerry is acting so out of character — thank goodness Putin is keeping a level head!
Some people just can’t admit when they’ve been played. Meep-meep, indeed.
Mandalay
@ruemara:
Of course. Putin paints the US as anxious to quickly attack Syria without providing any real evidence, and then comes up with a proposal to peacefully remove chemical weapons in Syria. How do think those two approaches appear to the rest of the world:? America is (yet again) the aggressive warmonger ready to attack without any justification, and Russia is presented as the constructive peacemaker. You can’t see that?
Riiiiiight…any opinion that does not conform to American MSM opinion is automatically supect. Gotcha.
geg6
@Omnes Omnibus:
Yeah, he bumbled into offering this exact outcome. Obviously, Putin whispered into his ear and dumb old John Kerry just blurted it out. Though I usually love the guy, Benen is going with the stupid bumbling John Kerry meme, too. Personally, I don’t think any of it was an accident.
Woodrowfan
@Mandalay:
compared to the average Georgetown host/hostess they are mental giants. Most of the few ,members pf the DC-elite I’ve met have been dimwits who, if it wasn’t for Daddy’s money and connections, would be failing late-shift managers at a Quickie-Lube.
geg6
@Mandalay:
You do understand that it wasn’t Putin who put this on the table, don’t you? That it was actually Kerry that put this idea out there?
John M. Burt
“Knowing how Cheney works on the sly, Hadley decided that the only way to stop him and the other neocon loons was to make Cheney’s plans known to Bush”
You know you’re really in there deep when your best option depends on the wisdom, prudence, independent-mindedness and good will of George W. Bush….
Woodrowfan
@geg6: why dumb? It gives the US a way out.
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
Really? It was Putin who was running around for the past week screeching about how Obama and Kerry are warmongering warmongerers who are just like Bush and Powell?
Funny, that’s not how I remember it. At all. I seem to remember more than one American doing the same thing. Including, well, you. Now all of a sudden it was all Putin’s doing.
Again, I stand by my two-word statement: Meep. Meep.
Gin & Tonic
I’ve written about this here before, but the Cheney/neocon crowd (primarily the Doom Brothers, Perle and Wolfowitz) have more than once gotten Russian/Soviet intentions completely wrong, and got within a hair’s breadth of starting nuclear war. Read about Able Archer 83, if you dare. That was all on the neocons, Committee on the Present Danger, that crowd. We were probably hours, not days, away from war; in the opinion of some renowned scholars, closer than we were even during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Omnes Omnibus
@geg6: It’s like people have no idea how diplomacy works. I’ll admit that I did not see this result coming and that it is not yet a done deal, but, Christ, the idea that the US might be heading toward military action and pursuing diplomatic options at the same time shouldn’t come as a surprise. It is the kind of thing that competent people do.
Mnemosyne
@Woodrowfan:
Not so much dumb as Kerry being crazy like a fox. But at least half the people who’ve been freaking themselves out because Obama=Bush and Syria=Iraq will never admit that, just like the rest of the world, it’s starting to look like maybe they got played.
Omnes Omnibus
@Woodrowfan: She not saying Kerry was dumb; she is mocking the people who were saying it.
Mandalay
@geg6:
Oh poppycock! Kerry put it out there as a strawman, and a spokeswoman explicitly clarified that Kerry was not being serious….
Kerry had no fucking clue that Putin would grab the opportunity to take center stage and propose a more appealing strategy for addressing the chemical weapons issue. And if Kerry did then he should be fired for incompetence.
lamh36
I gotta say, not for nothing but its got to be ironic that many of the same people who were big on John Kerry back in ’04, are the ones completely over him now. Conserv who hated Kerry then must be loving all this now.
Just an observation.
joes527
@Omnes Omnibus: K. Considering. How does his performance at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (where he was unprepared for the question “what if something unplanned happens”) and made a hash of his ad-lib, fit into this picture of Kerry as “the brain”?
Or was suggesting a ground invasion and then walking it back for the rest of the meeting all part of the plan too?
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
Seriously? This is is a win/win/win situation if it works. You think that Kerry just stupidly blundered into saying it while trying get a war started? Come the fuck on.
Ben Franklin
Take out Bandar and grease his ass with a smart-bomb or a smart-phone bomb, if you want to impact the Saudi salafists. It takes them a while to regroup because replacements are seen as competitors, and they dispatch them in advance leaving holes in the CoC.
Omnes Omnibus
@joes527: My thought is that they were pushing/seeking a wide variety of options. This happens to be the one that is working out.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Kerry and/or his minders are constantly having to clarify and/or walkback statements that Kerry has made as SoS. I haven’t researched it, but I think that the number of clarifications would exceed those needed for the entire duration of Clinton’s term as SoS, and Kerry has only had the job for a few months.
Kerry is way out of his depth as SoS.
geg6
@Woodrowfan:
I agree, but Anne Laurie and Steve Benen and Andrew Sullivan are all in on John Kerry being a dimwit. Either he just stumbled into finding a way out of this or it was actually Putin’s idea, Kerry stupidly stumbled onto the same idea, and somehow Kerry and Obama are too idiotic to know they’re getting played by Putin. I think that’s what they are all saying, anyway. I don’t speak firebagger or Puma or hysterical-racist-gay-guy-with-huge-Village-credibility-who-is-almost-always-wrong. Maybe someone fluent in either of those languages can interpret better than I.
Chyron HR
See, you Obots are assuming that your Dear Leader actually wanted to stop Assad from using chemical weapons on the Syrian people again. Sure, from THAT (incorrect) perspective Obama unilaterally got what he wanted, which would be a win for him.
Of course an unbiased mind can easily see that Obama actually wanted to bomb Syria because he’s evil, and also to get their
oilnatural gas pipeline. So of course the great hero Putin, friend to the snowmen, took away Obama’s excuse, leaving him crying in his soup. Meep-meep indeed, motherfuckers.Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
Maybe you should research it.
I disagree.
GregB
Saudi Arabia is the worst fucking den of shitheels on this planet.
They stoke the worst sectarian and religious fanatics on the planet.
Even if the US doesn’t attack Syria, I hope Putin puts that crumb-bum Bandar in his place.
geg6
@Mandalay:
Were you born yesterday? Yeah, that idiotic John Kerry! Doesn’t have a fucking clue! They’re walking it back! Except they’re not. They’ve given Assad a week.
Heliopause
I ran across the Putin-Saudi story last week but dismissed it because it had originated from a crank website. Now that it has mainstream cred here on Balloon Juice I’ll just say that it still seems like a crazy idea but, as crank theories go, it’s a very entertaining one.
balconesfault
I gotta admit … it really does sound like Kerry is going to be disappointed if we don’t end up dropping any bombs.
I’ve felt all along that Obama has been reluctant to do so, and has kept putting it off in search of something to justify a decision not to strike, but his Sec of State seems to relish the thought of at least one teeny little missile strike, please?
Chris
@Gin & Tonic:
The neocons are a kind of horrifying bastard child of the international relations theories of liberalism (the Wilsonian idealist crowd) and realism (the might-makes-right crowd). They share the utopian optimism of liberals and their belief that the world can be remade into something better, but not their appreciation for soft power or their ability to include others – to them, the world can only be made better at the point of an American gun. They share the amoral ruthlessness of realists, but not their ability to look at world politics coldly, dispassionately and rationally – they’ve got way too much American Exceptionalism for that. End result – the kind of power-mad, hopelessly incompetent crusaders who can come within a hair’s breadth of blundering into a nuclear war.
I really wonder what their reaction was after realizing how close they came in Able Archer. And I suspect it didn’t amount to much more than a shrug and a “moving on.” It would’ve worked out. God wouldn’t let America get nuked, after all. Besides, they’re smart people, they would’ve figured it out before it came to that.
Omnes Omnibus
@Chris: That is a really good thumb nail sketch of the neo-cons.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Yes, seriously, If Kerry’s remark was deliberate and calculated then why did his spokeswoman walk it back?
The prevailing view before Britain voted to stay out the shitstorm was that the US would attack before the G20 meeting,and then the Administration asserted that it would not be bound by anything that Congress proposed.
Yet now you are suggesting that Kerry craftily dropped a peace proposal for the clueless Putin to pounce upon? Even if that nonsense was true, how do you think the American and Russian solutions appear to the rest of the world? You really think Kerry was cunningly angling for the world to compare Obama’s military “solution” with Putin’s proposal to disarm? Christ.
Heliopause
Also, has anybody been following the End Times people on these events? I’m thinking that if I can tie the various actors together with the Book of Daniel and the Revelation and Gog and Magog I might be able to monetize this.
Gin & Tonic
@Chris: Somehow I’ve never had the temptation to place “utopian optimism” in the same paragraph, let alone on the same page, as Richard Perle.
geg6
@Mandalay:
Again, it wasn’t Putin who put it out there. And why wouldn’t you keep the pressure on Assad while the deal is negotiated? Are you really this stupid?
Gravenstone
@KG:
FTFY. Seriously, if this did come to pass and Russia attacked SA, do you believe we’d hesitate one hot moment before jumping in on SA’s side? Athat way lies WW III.
El Caganer
Hell, if a diplomatic solution removing CW from Syrian government control actually happens, I’d be happy to give everybody credit for it, whether they actually deserve it or not.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
I would say it looks like the US was threatening to bomb Syria for using chemical weapons and Russia suggested to the Syrians that they give up the weapons in order to avoid being bombed. And, finally, it looks like the Syrians may be giving up their weapons.
What is the goal? Is movement being made toward the goal? I would say the goals are stopping the use of chemical weapons and establishing the principle that use of them will have consequences. I would also say that if this works, those goals will be furthered.
@El Caganer: Bingo.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Omnes Omnibus: @geg6: The Kabuki of diplomacy – how does it work? Have more people than the usual wingnuts been struck
dumbwithout an understanding of the basics, not to mention nuance, after Labor Day? WTF?lamh36
stolen from twitter, cause it seems to fit here:
https://twitter.com/Kat4Obama/status/377201182067798017
lamh36
Is Rodman broke or something?
Mandalay
@geg6:
Then who did, bearing in mind that Kerry’s spokesperson explicitly retracted Kerry’s remark? I given a link to support my position. Where’s yours?
Because to the rest of the world America will be persuasively portrayed as a warmonger desperate to attack a small nation, regardless of the actual truth of the situation.
I am hardly the only person making this argument. Is Steve Benen really this stupid?
burnspbesq
@Omnes Omnibus:
The concept of good cop, bad cop seems to be beyond some folks’ comprehension.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
In this case, apparently so.
burnspbesq
@Mandalay:
Steve Benen is not stupid. Neither are you. But both of you have huge blind spots.
Chris
@Gin & Tonic:
I look at the predictive statements of the people who supported the Iraq War – about how we’d be greeted, about how easy and quick it would be to rebuild the country, about how quickly we could be out – and I think it fits to a tee.
lamh36
lamh36
But that Gwen Ifill is an O-bot of course.
ruemara
@Mandalay: Your world gets a completely different newspaper, because that’s not what happened.
Mandalay
@burnspbesq:
I guess so. Since you have made the analogy, who exactly are the “good cop” and the “bad cop”?
joes527
@Omnes Omnibus: Just which option did Kerry, looking like he came to the meeting unprepared, looking like he couldn’t think on his fee, and pissing off the committee “keep open?”
Seanly
I don’t care who’s idea it is as long as it keeps us from bombing Syria & getting involved in a civil war on the side of jihadists & al frigging qaeda.
Omnes Omnibus
@joes527: He could very well have fucked up at the hearing and been able to do other things competently. I am not trying to argue that some masterful grand strategy has been playing out. I am simply saying that there probably have been a number of options tossed around and that this one seems to have been seized on as workable. Something that is a win/win/win for the US, Russia, and Syria is unlikely to be the result of a walked back blunder by Kerry that Putin and Assad cleverly seized upon.
geg6
@Mandalay:
And the State Department has given Assad a week. That’s not a walking back as I understand the term. I don’t give a shit what some spokesmodel said. You know nothing at all about diplomacy whatsoever based on what I’ve read so far. And as far as Benen goes, yes, anyone can be that stupid and I’ve seen a few examples of Benen being stupidly firebaggerish since he moved to the Maddow Blog. Which, I guess, is to be expected based on whose is now signing his paycheck.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well whatever options they were seeking, asking Syria to hand over its chemical weapons clearly wasn’t one of them. Obama canceled his planned meeting with Putin at the G20. There is no way that he would have done that if he was considering getting Syria to relinquish its chemical weapons. And then Kerry explicitly walked back his “rhetoric” on the “impossibility” of that happening.
It’s early days, but at the moment Putin’s proposal has made the Administration look pretty clueless.
Morbo
@geg6: Well, Israeli Intelligence sort of called it a week+ ago. Makes you wonder if Kerry was really speaking in a hypothetical. Maybe this was a gaffe, or maybe it was something that had been discussed with Lavrov in advance and he let the cat out of the bag.
@Heliopause: The jihadist groups are way ahead of you on that one. Damascus plays a pretty critical role in Islamic eschatology.
joes527
So, the word so far is that the administration wants Congress to proceed with the vote to bomb. If the vote was a slam dunk, I could see his as a tactic to keep the heat on and maximize concessions from Putin-Asad.
But given that it looked dicey to start with, that the latest developments will give the left more reason to vote no. (Can’t get peace by telling folks we are going to kill them) And will give the right more reason to vote no (why hand Obama a victory if he isn’t even going to bomb anyone with it?)
How is this good politics?
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: Not so much.
ETA:
geg6
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well, lambh @72 has press confirmation that this is something Putin and Obama talked about last week in Moscow during their short meeting.
Still think John Kerry is a bumbling idiot, my firebagger friends?
Mandalay
@geg6:
Of course not. You have to ignore that clarification issued by Kerry’s spokesperson because it destroys your argument.
Since you selectively ignore statements coming from the SoS that refute your argument your opinion is worthless.
Omnes Omnibus
@joes527:
That I don’t know. I would think that they would want to postpone the votes.
Morbo
@Omnes Omnibus: Funny, the Senate did just that.
Omnes Omnibus
@Morbo: Well then.
geg6
@Mandalay:
Funnily enough, Obama and Putin actually had a meeting at the G20. Not the planned one, but a short private meeting. The press covered it. I saw it on CBS news and they characterized their demeanor after the meeting as seeming as if the meeting didn’t go well because of the serious faces they had on when they came out. Do you follow the news?
geg6
@Morbo:
That’s what I’m thinking. If it was a gaffe at all, it was a Joe Biden kind of gaffe, in that he got ahead of the president on it.
Omnes Omnibus
@geg6: Biden gaffes tend to intentional trial balloon things. FWIW
geg6
@Mandalay:
Meep meep, mothafucka.
joes527
@Morbo: Makes sense. The “administration still wants the vote.” story I read might just have been the news catching up with what was happening.
Interesting issue though. War Powers Act is still in force, so some might say it matters not at all, but we have a sitting president submitting to congress before taking action (while making noises about didn’t hafta)
All hanging fire.
Probably (hopefully?) forever.
Heliopause
@Morbo:
I can’t monetize Islamic eschatology here in the good ‘ol US of A. Let’s stick to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
geg6
@Omnes Omnibus:
Exactly. Allowing the UN, Britain, and Russia to all jump on board asap and get things moving before the president’s interviews even hit the airwaves.
Mino
@Omnes Omnibus: That rather undercuts his credibility for the future if one is seen as a scenery chewer.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Interesting, but….
– Strangely, there is no mention of this conversation in the PBS transcript:
– To buy into the good-cop-bad-cop argument, Obama would have had to agree to look like the asshole while Putin looked like Mother Teresa. Why would he do that?
– If this was secret diplomacy, why was Kerry public proclaiming it to be impossible?
It still looks like Putin blindsided and upstaged the Administration.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mino: Maybe, maybe not. It still makes more sense to me than suggesting that Kerry more or less went nuts over the last week or so.
SiubhanDuinne
FWIW, friend of mine (acquaintance, more accurately) just finished her basic at Ft. Leonard Wood, home for six months before scheduled deployment to Korea. Tonight she said she may have to go to Syria. Unofficial right now, I think, but apparently the rumor mills have the enlisted folk on edge.
Mandalay
@geg6:
You mean “jump on board” an approach that Kerry had explicitly branded as an “impossibility”?
Too funny.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: You are rather literal, aren’t you?
ETA: I am done here. This horse is dead, further beatings are useless.
Anne Laurie
@geg6:
Not me; I think Kerry is an experienced politician doing his best to keep a very dangerous situation from blowing up. I don’t think he’s getting much help from some of his “defenders” who insist that we must VOTE WAR NAOW, much less the neocons on the other side of the table, but I’ve never badmouthed Kerry!
(Closest I can find to your complaint, I did say I hoped the facial ‘puffiness’ the media keeps mentioning is not medically related, but that’s not passive-aggressive, I actually hope Kerry is in good health & fighting for Democrats, truth, justice, & the American way for many years to come.)
polyorchnid octopunch
@Mandalay: Everybody’s assuming that the admin wants this war. I don’t think it’s a safe assumption. I think that HoR repos (not to mention the repos in general) tried to use it as a stick to beat Obama with, and he’s now neatly turned it around on them; they get to go on record about it now, whether they want to or not, instead of just getting to use it to spew talking points.
I’m thinking a lot of them don’t really want to go on record because they know their constituents don’t want it, but they’re also getting a lot of pressure from the boys that pay the bills, and now they’re stuck.
If Obama really wanted it, he’d be doing a much more successful job of selling it to the US public than he has been doing. This looks a lot like an effort to damn with faint evidence to me.
geg6
@Mandalay:
LOL! Keep fucking that chicken, dude.
lojasmo
@Mandalay:
You don’t say?
Donut
Boom:
Those of you supporting use of the military against Syria have a fucking homework assignment. Get to it.
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
So Putin could save face internationally and get some good press after the international disasters of Putin’s ongoing support for Syria and the boycotts of Russian vodka.
The problem here seems to be that you’re having trouble letting go of your preconception that Obama wants to start bombing Syria and nothing is going to deter him from that goal. If Obama’s actual goal is to stop chemical weapons from being used on civilians, why would he care if Putin gets to look like the good guy protecting poor little Syria from “American aggression”? If it works, it works, and Obama is nothing if he’s not pragmatic about getting to his ends.
geg6
@Anne Laurie:
Okay, I take that back. I keep forgetting that he was your senator and that you know him well. But the hysteria over this that both you and Cole have evidenced in the last couple of weeks just drive me nuts. When has Obama ever shown that he does stupid stuff, especially in foreign policy?
Anne Laurie
@Seanly:
Seconded!
joes527
@Anne Laurie: I dunno. Even if he was playing a part, going Goodwin was hamming it up.
chopper
if y’all really want a laff go wade over to the GOS. the kos kids are in full-bore denial over the idea that a diplomatic solution is on the table. i give it a week before they start cannibalizing each other.
Mnemosyne
@polyorchnid octopunch:
This. I think what the admin wants is to stop the use of chemical weapons during this war, and they’re willing to go through multiple channels to get to that goal. If it takes bombing, they’re willing to do it, but bombing is not the actual goal — stopping the CW use is.
A Humble Lurker
@Mandalay:
I don’t know, maybe so Putin would think it was his idea? Maybe? Just maybe?
Citizen_X
I hate to interrupt the argument about whether or not Kerry accidentally became the hero a la the commander from F-Troop, but this shit?
Are you fucking kidding me? To quote General Buck Turgidson, “The Russians [would] go absolutely ape.” Was there nothing that Cheney couldn’t fuck up?
And then there’s this:
So please tell me why Iran is the font of all terrorism, again?
Suffern ACE
Nuts. Now I want to bomb Syria just to dare Russia to bomb Saudi Arabia over it. I bet they blink. if they don’t blink, I probably won’t have any money to pay those bets with anyway. I might as well bet a million that they blink.
Btw. It’s hard to claim that our leaders are the adults in the room when the only way to get them to seriously stop destabilizing the sovereign nation of Syria is to threaten to start a huge war.
Belafon
I’m not going to claim that Kerry’s slip was brilliant or that Obama seriously believed this would be the outcome of his threatening Syria with a military strike, because I don’t know what they were doing. But by going to Congress to try to convince them, and continuing to be the president and CiC, he has at least gotten talks moving in the direction he wants, and I bet everyone here wants even if they didn’t think it was worth the effort, which is controlling Syria’s chemical weapons. I’m not sure it’s 11-dimensional chess, but it’s definitely 2-dimensional, which is 1.5 more dimensions than the previous administration would have allowed.
Ben Franklin
@Mnemosyne:
Yeh. Becuz conventional weaponry is so much more humanitarian.
Jeebus H. on rubbah crutches.
Morbo
@Anne Laurie: Three cheers for guilt by association. What’s next, fighting in a war on the same side with communists? Thank goodness we’ve never done that.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
To the extent that when the Department of State today issued a prepared statement asserting that Kerry regards Assad turning over his chemical weapons as an “impossibility” I take that statement to reflect Kerry’s position. Since no correction has been issued that is clearly the case.
Yet others here ignore that evidence, and view Kerry as cleverly playing eleventy dimensional Calvinball, and insist that peacefully disarming Assad of chemical weapons was Kerry’s intention all along.
lojasmo
@SiubhanDuinne:
My drill seargant pulled the same shit on us during the Grenada conflict.
It’s all a bunch of theater.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Mandalay:
Maybe the “prevailing view” isn’t a good reflection of reality?
August 27 – Hagel:
The UK Parliament vote was August 29. The G20 Leaders Summit started September 5.
September 5:
But Hagel said they were ready for anything almost 2 weeks ago?!?!
And what about those reports in December 2012 that the Pentagon was drawing up plans to hit chemical weapons facilities?!?!
/snark
Maybe don’t take reports in the press as gospel.
Cheers,
Scott.
Ben Franklin
@Belafon:
I’m not sure it’s 11-dimensional chess, but it’s definitely 2-dimensional, which is 1.5 more dimensions than the previous administration would have allowed.
I think that could be called ‘incremental hope and change.’
Lady Bug
@Suffern ACE:
Yes, because Syria is the picture of “stability” right now…
Donut
@polyorchnid octopunch:
With all due respect, this makes absolutely no sense. What do the President and the SoS possibly have to gain from this scenario? I find it completely incredulous that these men, two of the most powerful people in the world, would put their legacies and their reputations out on the line like this, solely to score back-handed political points against the GOP-led house.
The GOP’s progressive counterparts today came up with 67 pointed questions they’d like answered before they sign on to an attack. If the punt to Congress was meant to tie up the GOP in knots, what do you think Kerry and Obama are trying to do to their Congressional allies?
I just don’t get the eleventy-zillion-dimensional-chess argument on this. That dog won’t hunt, IMHO.
Belafon
@Mnemosyne: Maybe Obama’s goals are to do some good, rather than look good doing squat.
Mandalay
@A Humble Lurker:
Well anything is possible until we know otherwise, but that seems pretty unlikely on the available evidence. If the Administration was in on this approach all along why wouldn’t Obama and Putin have jointly proposed that Syria hand over its chemical weapons?
That way everyone would look good except Assad. With the current situation (which can change of course), Putin gets all the glory and the Administration looks inept.
Belafon
@Ben Franklin: Do you know how hard it is to go from a half a dimension to two full ones? The fractals are so sparse at .5 that just to get a line requires an uncountably infinite number of points. Then you gotta go orthogonal.
Jeremy
@Mnemosyne: Well a lot of people have never really understood Obama. We have wingnuts on the left and the right who try to psycho analyze the President, and pretend they know who the “real” Obama is.
I’ve said it time and again but his leadership reminds me so much of Eisenhower and the “hidden hand” approach. And we should not forget that Eisenhower used the threat of nuclear weapons in order to end the Korean war. He did not plan on using then but the threat of using them was a way to get negotiations.
Mnemosyne
@Suffern ACE:
Wait, you were under the impression that the government of Syria was stable up until now? The civil war has already been going on for two years and over 1 million Syrians are now refugees from that ongoing war — on what planet is that government “stable”?
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
I know I said I was done here, but…
No one is arguing eleventy dimensional Calvinball. People are arguing ordinary diplomacy. Something that takes place on multiple tracks with multiple parties at the same time.
No one is arguing that peacefully disarming Assad of chemical weapons was Kerry’s intention all along. Stopping Assad from continuing to use chemical weapons was the goal. N’est-ce pas? Enforcing the norm against chemical weapon use was the goal. Oui? If this deal comes to pass, the goals are achieved. Assad will no longer have the weapons, so he won’t use them. And other countries will believe that the US and some other countries are willing to blow shit up if chemical weapons are used.
At the same time, Putin gets to be the peacemaker and gets a pat on the back. Maybe being put in that position makes him more amenable on some other issues, like gay rights and the Sochi Olympics. Who knows…
Belafon
@Mandalay: Inept to whom? If this works, Obama will have scared enough people that Putin has chosen to intervene. Most of the world, the US, were ready to allow Syria to continue with it’s chemical weapons. Obama kept everyone focused on it and is getting the Russians to do something.
Once again, if everyone were as inept as Obama, we’d have a whole lot of the worlds problems solved.
FlipYrWhig
Look, the point is to do something about the use of banned weapons while avoiding the proverbial quagmire of escalating war. If stalling, punting, dithering, gaffes, genius, serendipity, or whatever _results in the outcome you like_, take yes for an answer and move the fuck along. Leave breathless speculation about What It All Means to Tweety and Der Blitzertapper.
Mnemosyne
@Jeremy:
I think we’re running into the “alpha male” problem again. Remember during the election when we kept being told that Romney looked like an “alpha male” during the first debate and pundits everywhere were freaking out because OMG OBAMA LOOKED WEAK!
Frankly, I don’t think Obama cares about any of that “looking weak” or “alpha male” shit. It is, quite frankly, a White Dude obsession. If what needs to happen in order to get Syria’s CW under lock and key is for Putin to get to look like he’s the “alpha male” who made Obama back down, Obama is perfectly willing to do that, because he doesn’t care about it.
People are assuming that Obama cares about “saving face” or “looking strong” so of course he wouldn’t let Putin look like the hero. Obama doesn’t care about “proving his manhood” stuff, so he can come up with solutions that other politicians are reluctant to do in case it makes them “look weak.”
geg6
@Mnemosyne:
Not to mention that they are already in the middle of a huge war. It’s not like Syria has just been sitting around between Iran and Turkey peacefully going about it’s business or anything. And I don’t know about Mr. ACE, but in my youth, I had plenty adults threaten me with massive force when I was acting poisonous.
Morbo
@Mandalay: The administration is rewarded with the fact that the use of force was seen as a credible threat resulting in a political solution without having to resort to using force.
@Donut: The administration has spent the last two and a half years playing hot potato with itself in order to avoid touching Syria. If their heart was really in this thing they wouldn’t have kept the voice of the moderate opposition from lobbying Congress (since March).
geg6
@Mnemosyne:
THIS. THIS. THIS.
Damn, people are so tied up in knots over a guy who doesn’t have the same motivations that most of the white dudes who’ve ever held the office had. I really don’t think Obama’s ego is as delicate as your average white dude’s, let alone the raging egotists who’ve been president in my lifetime.
FlipYrWhig
@polyorchnid octopunch:
I think the whole thing has been a deliberately undertaken civics lesson about how the US political system is supposed to handle developing problems: the major players set forth their views, the branches of the government hear evidence and decide what they’re willing to do and how far they’re willing to go, and it looks sloppy and frustrating but maybe, just maybe, they can arrive at something wildly divergent political interests can all live with. I don’t know if the process has been great for the people of Syria, but it ain’t bad for the people of the US of A.
FlipYrWhig
@Mnemosyne: Good comparison.
Jeremy
@Mnemosyne: True ! Obama doesn’t care what the media, emo liberals, and right wingers think. Even Michelle Obama said that he doesn’t pay attention to them and thinks their tirades are just “noise”.
And I still don’t see how Putin looks so great if CW removal is the final outcome. Because no one did anything until the U.S. threatened to strike, and if it wasn’t for that the dynamics would be the same.
Donut
@FlipYrWhig:
I’ll sign on, gladly and with bells and whistles, to your general point, but Obama didn’t start at that place, IMO.
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/20/13379062-obama-draws-red-line-for-syria-on-chemical-and-biological-weapons?lite
That article is over a year old. Planning for military solution to the Assad problem has been in the works a long time, and they’ve been furiously coming up with new and assorted rationales lately.
I’d really rather they just come the fuck clean with every single fact they’ve got (which is what the Progressive Caucus asked for today) than constantly shift and restate the various arguments they’ve provided.
They have a lot of weak sauce and very little meat. What they’re doing now is, IMHO, wholly unconvincing and seems often like they’re pretty much winging it day to day. I like the president, a lot, but the last week has not been his best moment on foreign policy. Can we agree on that, or no?
polyorchnid octopunch
@Donut: That’s back to assuming they actually want to do this. It’s different if they don’t.
While we’re at it, don’t forget that one of these people will definitely never run for office again, and the other one almost certainly won’t… which means that there’s nothing in it for them one way or another. OTOH, having the progressive caucus accurately reflect what most Americans think while the republicans tie themselves into “obviously I like bombing brown people, but maybe I’d rather humiliate the near president; obviously my voters wants nothing to do with it but maybe my bagmen seem to be all over the idea of selling more missiles” knots in public will help the president’s party down the road in a year when it’s election time again… which will make it easier for him to do stuff that he wants to do towards the end of his term.
The main point being that neither of those guys are dumb, and they’re both well accustomed to dissembling in public to serve a political goal; they ARE politicians when all is said and done.
If I were Obama, repeating the classic blunder that destroyed the reputation of his immediate predecessor would be the last thing I’d want to do.
Ben Franklin
@Belafon:
I haven’t a clue as to the triangulations, and to pretend that you do is rather odd, almost like protecting the public from panic by withholding life-threatening events beyond our control.
I advise a simple prophylaxis of ‘do no harm’. Let the UN complete their report. A lesson in patriarchal paddling by a morally superior USG is just a shoe in the face of innocent Syrian victims.
hoodie
@Donut: Going back to Congress buys him time to put together a deal without looking like he’s not willing to carry out the threat. The effect on the GOP is a side issue because the progressive Dems are being consistent and, while Obama may disagree with them to some extent, he respects their position by going to Congress for approval. He knows the GOP is scared shitless to have the vote and they’ll vacillate and delay it as long as they can, especially when the Dems are not going to bail them out and public opinion is opposed to use of force. Boehner and Cantor know that the tactically sound thing for the House GOP to do is authorize use of force because it’s still Obama’s call as to whether to use it and he will be blamed if it goes wrong, but they can’t control the lunatics and grandstanders in their own caucus and their reflexive desire to reject anything he ostensibly wants along with their now well-known inability to make a decision about anything (they just like to bitch and hold meaningless hearings). Add to that enough progressive Dems who will vote no out of conscience and the whole thing bogs down while Obama and Kerry continue to call for urgency. It’s more B’rer Rabbit that eleven-dimensional chess. However, I sense that Obama will use force if he thinks it’s necessary, regardless of public opinion and the GOP.
Belafon
@Donut:
In what way? He’s kept the focus on Syria’s chemical weapons, and considering the people he’s had to deal with – Putin, McCain, GohmertBachmannKing – being able to adjust your strategy seems like a good thing, much better than “we’re bombing next week so get out now.” If this works, I’m not sure how you call this a bad week, and even if it doesn’t, the big players are still discussing the chemical weapons.
Chris
@Omnes Omnibus:
This.
@Mnemosyne:
And this.
Moreover, while Alpha Male shit may not be white male exclusively, Obama’s demonstrated time and time again that it’s simply not his style. He was happy to let Congress take the lead in the health care debate (which constitutionally was their role anyway). He was happy to let France and Britain take the lead in the campaign against Libya. He has repeatedly shown that he likes operating low key and is just not interested in the Bush style chest thumping and face saving. Letting Putin take all the credit may or may not be what’s happening, but it’s perfectly consistent with what we’ve seen him do in the last five years.
lojasmo
@Ben Franklin:
There’s a reason for the ban on chemical weapons, o my progressive better.
Donut
@Morbo:
Huh???
So the president is asking Congress for a AUMF on Syria as a complex ruse? You really think this? Seriously? That the CIC of the most powerful killing and destructive armed forces, ever assembled, is in effect just making a big fucking bluff? That he is asking 535 elected officials in Congress/Senate to go along with this and also put their asses on the line, because maybe he will attack or maybe he won’t? Really? You float this theory based on what evidence?
I’ll buy this if a resolution passes both houses and Obama pulls back and orders no strikes or attacks. Until then…That’s just craziness. Think that through a little. The endgame on that track is utter nonsense.
Chris
@hoodie:
Yeah, that occurred to me today. I already thought it was pretty brilliant last week, simply in terms of roping all his elected critics into the decision-making process. Now that it turns out to have the additional virtue of buying time for more diplomacy, it looks even better.
Ben Franklin
@lojasmo:
Please tell me why they are any worse than depleted uranium dust or white phosphorus or bouncin’ bettys or any other ordnance used in ‘conventional’ warfare, or get the fuck off the pot.
Donut
@Belafon:
Putin is against military intervention.
McCain is pro.
Gohmert against.
Bachmann against.
King is pro.
With all due respect, and I mean that very sincerely, no snark, I’m not sure your examples illuminate the issue very well.
lojasmo
@Ben Franklin:
Here, have a read. Basically, those 1400 people suffocated to death. Pretty gruesome.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ben Franklin: WWI veterans called, but they were coughing and wheezing.
Mnemosyne
@Donut:
I think he’s asking for it to keep all of his options open. As I said earlier, I think his actual goal is to stop chemical weapons from being used on civilians again and he is willing to put several different plans in motion to get to that goal. If this diplomatic plan falls through, he will probably push forward with the request for an AUMF.
The problem is that you seem to think that his goal is to bomb Syria. I think that’s where you’re wrong — his goal is to take CW out of Assad’s hands, and if he can do it without having to bomb Syria, he’ll consider that a win.
And, yes, considering that Obama and Putin did have a short sit-down last week at G20, I suspect this was brewing under the radar and that diplomatic talks have been ongoing throughout the last couple of weeks. This was not Obama’s Fuck Saddam, I’m taking him out week despite what some people here were claiming.
Mnemosyne
@Ben Franklin:
Other than the (unproven so far) claims about depleted uranium, please let us know which of the weapons you listed cause cancer and birth defects in the survivors the way mustard gas does. We’ll wait here while you research that.
Ben Franklin
@lojasmo:
No my naive friend. How many have died during the entire period of the rebellion? Think about the body parts of babies laying in the street, strewn in with the refuse of the living and the offal of war, all with conventional weaponry. I am moved by the pictures, but the pictures are selective.
This is the cover story you have fallen for.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ben Franklin: You didn’t read the article, did you?
Donut
@Belafon:
And to answer your question, hit up Teh Google machine and compare what the Admin said about Syria two years ago, last year, now this year..
We’ve gone from this:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/18/president-obama-future-syria-must-be-determined-its-people-president-bashar-al-assad
To a red line on chemical weapons that they either cannot or will not prove definitively:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/08/denis-mcdonough-syria_n_3889848.html
They are not consistent and are not giving the world hard proof. If they have it, they need to show it.
lojasmo
@Ben Franklin:
A lot of people have died and suffered in Syria. I gave you a link. Read it, and stop being willfully obtuse.
Chemical weapons are banned for good reasons. They are indiscriminate weapons of mass destruction, they are mutigens, and the cause of death is gruesome.
Give me a choice between being blown up by a bomb, and being paralyzed and suffocated by Sarin gas, I’ll take the bomb. every. time.
lojasmo
@Omnes Omnibus:
No shit. And s/he won’t either.
hoodie
@Ben Franklin: You’re what my old man used to call a moral idiot. What that gas attack showed is that it could get a lot worse if the parties start getting more desperate. CW out of the picture is one step in reducing the potential carnage. They are Assad’s ace in the hole. He heads a minority ethnic group that is probably in constant fear of being overwhelmed. If Assad thinks he can’t fall back on CW, maybe he starts getting realistic about an exit strategy. This also tells him the Russians can’t save him and are only willing to go so far to help him. It works for Putin because it doesn’t look like he’s directly bailing on Assad. He’s just being a good guy and protecting him from the business end of a Tomahawk.
Origuy
@Donut: Over 30000 people work in the Pentagon. I’m sure a lot of those people are not sitting around playing Minesweeper; they are working out contingency plans for every kind of military situation imaginable. It doesn’t surprise me that they know every military installation in Syria. They probably have plans on file to attack every country in the world, just to keep in practice.
Morbo
@Donut: Why bother asking for Congressional approval if bombing the shit out of Syria was the goal? I know we’d love to believe Obama’s all about doing things by the law (ok, maybe not all of us), but has that really constrained the executive from hitting someone he wasn’t already inclined to hit for the last half century?
Donut
@Mnemosyne:
I respect your opinion, but I disagree. I think he’s shifted from his 2011 position, which I agreed with then, and still agree with now. I think he wants Assad gone, badly, and the chemical weapons argument is a front to achieve that. And I think he thought he would get more support from Congress. I don’t think he imagined that taking out an ally of Iran and Hezbollah would be so strongly resisted by the GOP caucus. Of course he would expect some reflexive opposition, but not what he’s been getting. I guess I don’t really think this is about chemical weapons. I know you do. I don’t know with any certainty that either of us is correct, but I have not been able to buy the CW rationale. I don’t see the hard evidence being presented.
Morbo
@Donut: And for the record no I don’t think this was 11 dimensional chess. I think Obama bungled himself into a corner with the “red line” language in the past, and I think the whole administration has presented a jumble of messages since August 21. Obama very likely did discuss options with Putin at G20 in a room where a fly on the wall would have gotten frostbite, and Kerry’s talk today likely was enough of a trial balloon to get the Russians to bite on one. He has stumbled his way into an out.
Ben Franklin
@lojasmo:
Damn straight. Life is too short to waste it on assholes.
hoodie
@Donut: Obama wants the war in Syria to end because it is incredibly destabilizing to the region and threatens to blow up into a bigger conflict. You have to get rid of Assad because he can’t control the country anymore. He’s from an ethnic minority and demographics and climate have upset the delicate balance that kept him and his cronies in power. There are millions of refugees, cross border incursions into Turkey and Lebanon, etc. Do you think for one minute we won’t end up involved if Lebanon, Turkey and/or Israel get involved? Part of the problem is that Assad still thinks he can win and go back to the status quo ante. The CWs reinforce that, especially if he thinks he can get away with using them. He knows that others, namely Saddam, used them and survived insurgent movements and other hazards. Saddam used them against the Iranians because they were kicking his ass. They work if you’re not worried about indiscriminately killing a bunch of innocent bystanders. But they likely won’t save Assad.
lojasmo
@Ben Franklin:
Evidently too short to educate your fucking self too.
Fuck off.
smintheus
Not everyone got the war in the Caucasus backwards. I’m pretty sure I had it pegged accurately right from the get go as an attempt by Saakashvili to drag the US into war with Russia based on his close ties to Republican leaders, particularly the hot-headed and dumb John McCain.
Omnes Omnibus
@smintheus: I first read that as Shalikashvili and was confused.
Chris
@Donut:
If nothing else, I agree on that. Libya provoked controversy, but nothing like this.
smintheus
@Omnes Omnibus: Shalikashvili had an evil twin.
Omnes Omnibus
@smintheus: I did shots with Shali at one point. It was cool. I did not do shots with Saaka….
Socoolsofresh
What I love in this thread is the theory that only white males care about being alpha. It is like no one has listened to any hip hop music. Also, Obama doesn’t care about being alpha, he just happened to end up in the most alpha position that exists in the world! But he is just so cool that he doesn’t even care about the alpha game! Some amazing thinking going on here.
jonas
@Heliopause: you just need to run an ad on Newsmax or some winger site with the banner “5 Ways to Profit from the Apocalypse that Obama Doesn’t Want You to Know!!”
Omnes Omnibus
@jonas: OMFG that is brilliant.
e.a.f.
that was certainly an interesting read. some of it makes sense and explains a few details.
It simply made no sense to go kill more people because allegedly 1400 were killed by one method, while 100K were killed in another method, which was o.k. When that happens, it makes one wonder.
Now it would be interesting to know why China is supportive of Syria or is it because Russia is supportive, not that you’d think China and Russia have all that much in common beyond being dictatorships in one form or another.
teiresias
@Morbo: Obama seems to “stumble” into a lot of outs. After a while, you have to admit that he’s either the luckiest son of a bitch ever to make it into the White House, or he is really, really good at pulling other peoples’ strings given a long enough time to play with them. We know he’s a trekkie — I’m starting to think his favorite series would have to be DS9.
Boohunney
@Omnes Omnibus:
This direct line to intervention by Obama and Kerry seems very strange to me, too. I don’t think the “masks” have been removed exposing the true Neo-con within… No bipartisanship talk, no compromise talk, nothing like that… Strong Hawks on the Right are Peaceniks, now?
Who put the roofie in my cawfee????