Those opposed to a Syrian strike had me at “John McCain and Lindsay Graham think it’s a swell idea!”
Mark Thiessen, WaPo:
The Libyan war gave us the doctrine of “leading from behind.” Now, in Syria, we are about to see the birth of a new Obama Doctrine: military action “just muscular enough not to get mocked.”
That’s how one U.S. official described President Obama’s plans for a strike against the Assad regime. This is far worse than leading from behind. At least in Libya, Obama’s reluctant intervention led to the toppling of the dictator. In Syria, administration officials say their goal is to strike the regime without dramatically altering the country’s balance of power. This is nonsensical. The very purpose of military action is to “alter the balance of power” in a conflict. If that is not your objective, you should not use military power.
So what is Obama’s objective in Syria? In an interview with PBS, Obama said it would be to fire a “shot across the bow” of the Syrian regime. Huh? A “shot across the bow” is a warning shot. It is designed to send a message that a far more devastating response will follow if the target does not alter its behavior. But Obama has already ruled out broader military action. “I have no interest in any kind of open-ended conflict in Syria,” he said last week. “I assure you nobody ends up being more war-weary than me.”
In other words, he’s just planning to blow some stuff up.
Maybe that’s why Obama has not been able to build a coalition to join him in Syria. It seems no one (save the French) wants to participate in an attack “just muscular enough not to get mocked.” NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he sees “no NATO role in an international reaction to the [Syrian] regime.” The British Parliament has rejected the use of force in Syria. None of the Middle Eastern nations seeking to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad are backing Obama either, because, as The Post reported this weekend, they are concerned that “limited strikes could actually work in Assad’s favor.”
They are right. When you say that your objective is to do just enough “not to get mocked,” you are projecting weakness — and weakness is provocative.
We’ve discussed this here plenty, but let’s just flesh it out one more time: Obama is a faculty lounge president steeped in leftist “intellectualism” which is, at its base, nothing more than an attempt to control reality by convincing people that all truths are contingent, that they are man-made, and that meaningful consensus is the font from which we must draw our policy prescriptions. That such consensus can be bought, manipulated, and controlled through language, coalition-building, threats of violence, and propaganda — that’s a plus for those who have far too routinely let on how much they admire the Chinese system of government.
Progressives are authoritarians who wish to control what they want us to perceive is still a free country.
Obama is more than just a progressive. He’s an academic leftist and Marxist. And so his ideology is built on the belief that he can control reality elsewhere to the same extent the left has been able to do so here, as we’ve relaxed and let our guard down, comfortable in our standard of living and willing to give in to the demands of interest groups, etc., until at long last we look up and find that we are subjects rather than citizens, controlled by a coalition of manufactured consent — one in which people believe (and have been taught to believe) that they have a “right” to the labor of others. He believes in transnational progressivism, which is no more than the world-march of leftist totalitarianism to be sold and run as an egalitarian Utopia by pampered bureaucrats, its edifice protected by the sting of a million regulatory paper cuts.
The only problem is, sometimes reality fights back, and Obama in this instance is dealing with the inanity of the whole anti-foundationalist, post-structuralist worldview. He can’t manipulate world perception here. He can’t straddle the line and still save face, and thus far, the statements about the planned strike have been, as Thiessen points out, surreal: it is a meta-show of force that everyone knows is a ruse, because it is undercut by the admission that no real force will be used. And all so Obama can show he’s “acted” — that he’s serious, but not necessarily belligerent, that he’s muscular enough that, should he need to, he’d send out additional warning shots before assuring his base that he isn’t interested in regime change.
Either Obama is completely out of his depth — and he has signaled that to the Syrian leadership and other world leaders; or else he is actively interested in aiding the rebels, among whom is insinuated al Qaeda.
Which means that, like in Egypt, Obama seems interested in helping the enemies of the west take over entire countries, presumably under the assumption that he and his fellow progressives can then tame the brutes and keep them as permanent clients, much like they do with minorities here at home.
Typical arrogant failing of the left: they always believe they are more respected, more liked, and more admired then they really are. That’s a danger of creating your own reality: it has a tendency to convince you to believe your own hype, only to learn that the smell of your bullshit — while a few voters missed it — wasn’t lost on reality itself.
Beyond simply saying “NO” to Obama’s request, this moment could also prove opportune to eliminating John Boehner’s Speakership and Eric Cantor’s Republican Majority Leadership. Oust the morons. Do it now.
Find yourself in a deep hole without future prospects? Stop digging.
Vote no on Obama’s request for authority to wage war.
Vote Boehner and Cantor out of their positions. Do it for the children.
Either Obama is completely out of his depth — and he has signaled that to the Syrian leadership and other world leaders; or else he is actively interested in aiding the rebels, among whom is insinuated al Qaeda.
I used to think he was out of his depth, or, more precisely, incredibly stupid. I now believe he is actively attempting to destroy the country, both at home and abroad, as some sort of penance for the imaginary sins of his predecessors, i.e. colonialism, racism, etc. Stupidity cannot explain his actions since January of 2009.
Seconded.
Just overheard on the radio news: Obama: ” [my war plan] is proportional. It is limited.”
Oh?
J. Madison, Federalist no. 41:
*** With what color of propriety could the force necessary for defense be limited by those who cannot limit the force of offense? If a federal Constitution could chain the ambition or set bounds to the exertions of all other nations, then indeed might it prudently chain the discretion of its own government, and set bounds to the exertions for its own safety.
How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation? The means of security can only be regulated by the means and the danger of attack. They will, in fact, be ever determined by these rules, and by no others. ***
FWIW, Rush was just now mentioning an article by Yossef Bodansky that questions whether Assad is really responsible for the gas attacks. In other words, has al Qaida/the Muslim Brotherhood used Sarin in rebel held areas to fool the US into blaming, and then taking out Assad?
I wouldn’t put it past them.
I dunno. The thought that al Qaeda is using WMD on Muslims instead of infidels, seems a little out of character.
I mean, there’s all those Jews just southwest of Syria. If a bunch of suicidal lunatics have the Sarin, why wouldn’t they call down the wrath of IDF on themselves?
They kept telling us the splodeydopes wanted us in a War on Islam…
Well, if they aren’t the “right kind” of Muslims, I don’t see them scrupling much over it. Pretty much everything is lawful if you’re waging jihad, innit?
Tresspassers W is right. There are the “wrong” kind of Muslims and I wouldn’t put it past Al Qaeda to gas them and try to pin it on Assad.
My question is why do we wish to aid Al Qaeda in any effort?
I also the second the motion to oust all of the turncoat motherfuckers of the democrat wing of the republican party who have decided to get their chickenhawk on with Presbo.
I keep going back and forth on the notion that it wasn’t Assad behind the sarin attack. However, I lean towards it not being Assad at the moment. I don’t see why he would take the chance on bringing us into it against him. Conventional weapons can do the same amount of killing.
However, either way I want us to stay out of it unless they attack us or Israel.
If I have to listen to Le Kerry give one more history lesson of a speech, I am going to scream.
Where is Jughead? Shouldn’t he be out here making his case to the American Peoples?
Leigh, he is golfing. That five iron isn’t gonna swing itself.
Ah ha! I knew one of you would know.
My 16 year old just texted me: “Why don’t we just use some chemical weapons on Assad’s people and show him who’s boss. Then we can make them a territory.”
The sarcastic little booger. That’s my boy.
Argh. Sgt. Hagel is on now making the case that he and Kerry know from war.
I don’t think Assad has ever believed Obamerica was any threat to him, so why not kick sand in the Unicorn Prince’s face?
Bob Menendez is chairing this meeting.
I rest my case as to the seriousness of this horseshit.
“Only a few missile strikes. It’s not like it’s war-war!”
— John Kerry
And when Syria strikes back at Americans with chemical weapons, having been struck by an act of war on the part of the Americans, Senator Kerry? What is it then? Tiddly-winks?
“Well, the strikees may have a different opinion . . .”
Nancy Pelosi’s Mid-East Logic: We’re Going To Have To Fight This War To Find Out Who’s In It…..
cranky, and I don’t remember where I saw it, and admit I’m too lazy to look it up, I think I read something that indicated there was every possibility the gas attack was unintentional, that it was caused by people moving chemical weapons that had no idea or business moving such weapons.
leigh, I’d text your boy back tell him you’re not interested in a new territory, that you’d be just fine with an enormous glass parking lot..that would be ready to use in about 30 years or so.
“no idea about or business”
Arghh…
in other baracky news
Special report: We all thought Libya had moved on – it has, but into lawlessness and ruin
Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi
Assad has been winning the war over the past several months. Why would he chance gassing some his enemies knowing that there is a strong possibility someone in The West would retaliate?
Is that the question Bob?
Or is the question — much as the question when ObamaCare was shoved down the throats of Americans who overwhelmingly opposed its passage — what do the Americans want to do regarding Syria?
For all we can tell, the Americans are massively opposed to going to war with Syria. Yet our Emperor and his court will see to it otherwise.
What act of war has Syria committed against the United States in the last month that now requires our making pin-prick war on Syria? None that I know of. Why then, are we to make war on Syria? Because our self-assuming pretend sovereign, Barack Hussein Obama (who cannot even describe an enemy of the United States) says we must, on his honor.
This is lunacy, regardless of the crimes al-Assad commits against his suffering people.
The Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party Prepares for War
[…] Jeff Goldstein, I believe, has nailed it, glued it, and screwed it [worth quoting nearly in full]: […]
Oh, I agree, Sdferr.
I don’t ulltimately care if they gas each other so that no one is left alive in Syria. In fact, I care more about the survival of the historic sites.
As long as Israel is not in danger, we should stay the Hell out of this. As Mrs. Palin said: ‘Let Allah sort it out’, and, I would add: Mohammedins killing each other is a good thing that I would work to encourage around the world [as long as I’m sitting here waiting for those ‘Moderate Muslims’ to materialize].
code update
pgh 1 mil 1 4th
hmmn, what i see is 2 – 2, t4, 1out
I’m not sure who is holding the aces in this game, but my money is on Putin being the puppet master.
yes, right after posting the radio guy change his facts on the ground
Supplement your radio. It runs a little behind real-time, but not too awful bad.
i’m listening to kdka. the dude or me had a senior moment.
oh and i think he said : cin 1 stl 0 final
oh noes baracky and orangeman
U.N. Chief Warns Against Strike on Syria
code
pgh3 mil2
about d. west’s book
Recognizing the Wrong People
code
pgh4 mil3 9th
The other day, someone told me we were going to intervene in Syria because we can’t just allow brown people to kill each other; we have to kill the brown people. Which made me feel all racisty.
So instead, I suggest that we in fact do leave the brown people to their own killing-each-other devices.
Which sounds racist, I admit. It’s a quandary.
I suggest that we in fact do leave the brown people to their own killing-each-other devices.
works in chitown, detroit, nyc, et al
Assad made Obama look ridiculous, and a man in Obama’s position can’t afford to look ridiculous. So he’s going to
run him out of town!send a message of some kind not Sicilian.Also concerning the book by Diana West. A review and a video (skip ahead to 12 min for start of the talk).
Kerry on ground troops in Syria, he’s sorta for them maybe or sorta against them sorta, well anyway they might be useful, maybe kinda sorta.
Someone should make Kerry eat their medals.
Or at least make him chew on them a little to get the idea. He is a loathsome toad. He is just about the worst possible wretch to sell this fiasco.
Kerry inadvertently told the truth before he got his yes vote.
But again, who in the West would be a “strong possibility” to retaliate?
Obama? <snicker> He only retaliates against reporters who ask real questions, and private citizens who dare to oppose his policies. People with actual, like, armies and shit? Not so much.
What’s the benefit* to Assad of gassing his own people? It’s not like the government is losing, is it? Or is it? I really don’t know.
n.b. “shits and giggles is an acceptable answer
“Jeremiah Wright? Bill Ayres? Hardly knew them. Red line? Nope, not mine.”
By transferring his own false presumption of sovereignty over the United States to make the world sovereign over the United States (“I didn’t set a red line”) ObaZma turns to the worst falsehood he can find at hand. This great thief is truly beyond reckoning. Best rid the country of his ministry. Impeachment would serve.
Grade – “P” for “Present,” with hope for improvement if he applies himself.
If this was simply a Hollywood production they’d have fired the lead 5 years ago.
. . . you’ve just got to figure it out and swim against the current and grab onto this rock and that, and just try to maintain your course.”
So he’s a drowner, not a leader. And all the rest of y’all should just go drown with him, Bob De Niro don’t need ya.
“It wasn’t me who set the red line, it was you guys.” “You’re all to blame for this mess.”
What will the President do if Congress says “No”?
If Congress says “No” doesn’t that change his authority to launch a military attack that Congress has specifically said if off limits?
Bobby De Niro, while at times a great actor, is from all reports black hole stupid. And not just about politics.
A shorter Obama would be:
“I didn’t build that ‘red line’, somebody else built it for me.”
That’s the Manchurian
Candidate’sIncumbent’s idea of a win-win.Either he get’s to embarrass and weaken the United States by means of a really futile and stupid gesture authorized by Congress Or he gets to do it anyways, while also making Congress look ridiculous when they don’t impeach his ass after he uses the force they declined to authorize him to use.
Welcome to the United States of Delta House.
To-ga, to-ga, to-ga…
[…] From CNS News, Susan Jones reporting [tip of the fedora to GeoffB]: […]
[…] “[Obama] can’t manipulate world perception here. He can’t straddle the line and still save face, and thus far, the statements about the planned strike have been, as Thiessen points out, surreal: it is a meta-show of force that everyone knows is a ruse, because it is undercut by the admission that no real force will be used. And all so Obama can show he’s ‘acted’ — that he’s serious, but not necessarily belligerent, that he’s muscular enough that, should he need to, he’d send out additional warning shots before assuring his base that he isn’t interested in regime change. Either Obama is completely out of his depth — and he has signaled that to the Syrian leadership and other world leaders; or else he is actively interested in aiding the rebels, among whom is insinuated al Qaeda. Which means that, like in Egypt, Obama seems interested in helping the enemies of the west take over entire countries, presumably under the assumption that he and his fellow progressives can then tame the brutes and keep them as permanent clients, much like they do with minorities here at home.” —Jeff Goldstein, Say No to a Feckless Syria Strike […]
[…] “[Obama] can’t manipulate world perception here. He can’t straddle the line and still save face, and thus far, the statements about the planned strike have been, as Thiessen points out, surreal: it is a meta-show of force that everyone knows is a ruse, because it is undercut by the admission that no real force will be used. And all so Obama can show he’s ‘acted’ — that he’s serious, but not necessarily belligerent, that he’s muscular enough that, should he need to, he’d send out additional warning shots before assuring his base that he isn’t interested in regime change. Either Obama is completely out of his depth — and he has signaled that to the Syrian leadership and other world leaders; or else he is actively interested in aiding the rebels, among whom is insinuated al Qaeda. Which means that, like in Egypt, Obama seems interested in helping the enemies of the west take over entire countries, presumably under the assumption that he and his fellow progressives can then tame the brutes and keep them as permanent clients, much like they do with minorities here at home.” —Jeff Goldstein, Say No to a Feckless Syria Strike […]
[…] Recently, with war drums beating inside the Middle East’s White House, Bob linked and posted regarding a post about all that on his blog by Jeff Goldstein. […]