Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria

[red_elk]

Looks like we're definitely heading towards at least a no-fly zone now.

It would not be "at least", maintaining a no-fly zone is much harder than throw a dozen of cruise missiles around. It's unclear whether NATO has enough forces in the region for that.

Interfax reporting that Russia is increasing its group of military ships in Eastern Mediterranean.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

The geopolitical game is hardly played the way you described except by the US. China has 200,000 medical professionals in 49 countries. Cuba has tens of thousands of doctors and teachers all over the world. Iran sent doctors to the Iraq border to help Iraq war refugees in 2003 (don't argue with me, one of our volunteers' father was on several missions until they started getting rape cases and the US forced them to leave.

The Chinese are utilizing soft power because they cannot use hard power. The Iranians are utilizing soft power because they cannot use hard power.

One can argue the US has made blunders in its execution of hard power at times (handing over Iraq to the Iranians), but to say the soft power has a greater role than hard power is ridiculous.

In any case, what will likely happen in Syria, I think, is a limited missile strike designed to be a show of force rather than make much alter the balance of power between the rebels and loyalists.

Some new sources are saying that Obama wants the strike finished and over with before the G20 summit. Probably the right thing to do. Strikes could begin as early as today if that is what Obama wants.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

@DemonicAppleGuy:
Here we go again...

Power = The ability to start and stop motion. Not "obliterate and dominate." Hard v. soft power is a dichotomy high school video game players and Civil Society bourgeoisie mouthpieces use.

If you can't get someone to do what you want except by obliterating them, that ain't power.

Trust me, not everyone wants to launch cruise missiles. Some people do the correct, humanitarian thing and that earns them respect. Just because China does not use its impressive military to invade other nations, doesn't mean it can't.

FYI, the Chinese military's main activity involves disaster relief. Ditto for Cuban military.

And, believe it, the ten-year Iran-Iraq War 1979 - 1989 proved Iran is quite capable of military action.

Sent via mobile.

 

[red_elk]

The Chinese are utilizing soft power because they cannot use hard power.

It seems they don't want to use it much, their military spending is only 2% of GDP.
Much better than spending billions of dollars to build dozens of F-22, which you never going to use. Simply because the only worthy opponents for using them are the countries, USA cannot use hard power against.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Power = The ability to start and stop motion. Not "obliterate and dominate." Hard v. soft power is a dichotomy high school video game players and Civil Society bourgeoisie mouthpieces use.

Hard power is derived from the ability to "obliterate and dominate". Soft power is derived from the idea that your investment, services, and the like for a country will be so useful to that country that the country will be impelled to work with you.

If you can't get someone to do what you want except by obliterating them, that ain't power.

Hard power doesn't always involve obliteration bby, sometimes it involves the threat of obliteration. If you don't carry out the threat, where is your hardpower? Not there.

Trust me, not everyone wants to launch cruise missiles. Some people do the correct, humanitarian thing and that earns them respect. Just because China does not use its impressive military to invade other nations, doesn't mean it can't.

Who, realistically, could the Chinese invade without suffering massive consequences?

FYI, the Chinese military's main activity involves disaster relief. Ditto for Cuban military.

So...?

And, believe it, the ten-year Iran-Iraq War 1979 - 1989 proved Iran is quite capable of military action.

So, the one where Iraq tried to invade Iran? Because that is not an example of the Iranians using hard power.

You need to stop spewing rhetoric along the lines of "soft power 2 op OMG OMG OMG hard power sux" because it's useless in a talk about the real world.

If hard power were really useless, there'd probably be some agreement that the US isn't the strongest country country. But I don't see many people saying that.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

@DemonicAppleGuy:
Here we go again...

...Hard v. soft power is a dichotomy high school video game players and Civil Society bourgeoisie mouthpieces use.

I rest my case, DAG.

Does anyone want to discuss the facts of the matter at hand -- such as there is no coclusive evidence linking the chemical attacks to the Syrian government, who, btw, is winning their war on terror.

Sent via mobile.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Update



http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...ows-assad-will-face-appropriate-consequences/

(Canadian article; Baird is our foreign affairs minister)

Discussion

Obama has now officially come out against the Syrian regime. No more Kerry. No more Biden. The president of the United States has officially accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons.

Looks like we're definitely heading towards at least a no-fly zone now.

Who knows? Maybe CIA intel is more conclusive on the matter.

Well, Thursday is here.


And Syria, ... is GUILTY!

AP is reporting it too now.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-28-23-22-04

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama on Wednesday declared unequivocally that the United States has "concluded" that the Syrian government carried out a deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians. Yet U.S. intelligence officials say questions remain about whether the attack could be linked to Syrian President Bashar Assad or high officials in his government.

No fly zone is usually the next step, but would have to do it without UN approval this time since Russian veto.

2 carriers might not be enough for that. Have we taken over Cyprus yet?

Looking like 200 cruise missile barrage still most likely.


How are the allies and Congress doing today?

Britain:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...meron-backs-down-on-urgent-Syria-strikes.html

10:00PM BST 28 Aug 2013

David Cameron backed down and agreed to delay a military attack on Syria following a growing revolt over the UK's rushed response to the crisis on Wednesday night.

The Prime Minister has now said he will wait for a report by United Nations weapons inspectors before seeking the approval of MPs for “direct British involvement” in the Syrian intervention.

Downing Street said the decision to wait for the UN was based on the “deep concerns” the country still harbours over the Iraq War.

MPs had been recalled to vote on a motion on Thursday expected to sanction military action. Instead, after a Labour intervention, they will debate a broader motion calling for a “humanitarian response”.

A second vote would be required before any British military involvement. This could now take place next week.

In a statement on Wednesday night Downing Street said that it only wanted to proceed on a “consensual basis” and was now wary about becoming embroiled

Wants to wait for the UN? Typical.


France?:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/us-syria-crisis-hollande-idUSBRE97S0CU20130829

Thu Aug 29, 2013 6:33am EDT

(Reuters) - French President Francois Hollande said on Thursday that Syria needed a political solution, but that could only happen if the international community could halt killings like last week's chemical attack and better support the opposition.

Hollande sounded a more cautious note than earlier in the week, when he said France stood ready to punish those behind the apparent poison gas attack that killed hundreds of civilians in Damascus.

He indicated that France was looking to Gulf Arab countries to step up their military support to the opposition to President Bashar al-Assad, after Paris said this week it would do so.

"Everything must be done for a political solution but it will only happen if the coalition is able to appear as an alternative with the necessary force, notably from its army," Hollande told reporters after meeting the head of the opposition Syrian National Coalition, Ahmed Jarba...

...A French warship, the Chevalier Paul, has left its dock at the Mediterranean port of Toulon, shipping authorities told Reuters, though they declined to confirm a media report that the frigate was headed to Syria. Military sources said France's Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier was still docked in Toulon.

They want our army to be in position first to attack Syria before they do anything?

At least their most powerful warship can guard Toulon I guess.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuttling_of_the_French_fleet_in_Toulon


Congress?
http://news.yahoo.com/on-syria--obama-says-eyeing-‘shot-across-the-bow’-222156121.html

President Barack Obama promised Wednesday that any U.S. military strike at Syria would be a “shot across the bow” that avoids seeing America pulled into “any kind of open-ended conflict.”

Speaking in a wide-ranging interview with PBS Newshour, Obama insisted he has not made a decision on how best to respond to the alleged massacre of civilians by forces loyal to Syrian strongman Bashar Assad using chemical weapons.

But “if, in fact, we can take limited, tailored approaches, not getting drawn into a long conflict — not a repetition of, you know, Iraq, which I know a lot of people are worried about — but if we are saying in a clear and decisive but very limited way, we send a shot across the bow saying, stop doing this, that can have a positive impact on our national security over the long term,” the president said.

That would send the Assad regime “a pretty strong signal, that in fact, it better not do it again..."

...Separately, the administration planned to give the chairmen and ranking members of key congressional committees as well as the top leaders from each party in each chamber a classified briefing Thursday on the case against Assad, two officials said.

Mmm, briefings and explanations. Looks like Thursday has been called off.
Maybe next week?

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Does anyone want to discuss the facts of the matter at hand -- such as there is no coclusive evidence linking the chemical attacks to the Syrian government, who, btw, is winning their war on terror.

As stated previously, it matters little who undertook the chemical attack. Action will likely be taken before conclusive evidence is found pointing in any direction.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Mmm, briefings and explanations. Looks like Thursday has been called off.
Maybe next week?

They'll definitely want to get it done before the G20 summit.

 

[Rashiminos]

AP is reporting it too now.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-28-23-22-04

I was thinking of buying the writers drinks, but then I realized the scare quotes around concluded were yours.

Wants to wait for the UN? Typical.
France?:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/us-syria-crisis-hollande-idUSBRE97S0CU20130829
They want our army to be in position first to attack Syria before they do anything?

It's not their project, so they're not taking the first blows.

Congress?
http://news.yahoo.com/on-syria--obama-says-eyeing-‘shot-across-the-bow’-222156121.html

I fail to see how shooting across the bow is not a bellicose action.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

What about some truth squad action from xinhua news?

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-08/29/c_132673208.htm

Syria requests UN to investigate three extra chemical attacks

English.news.cn
2013-08-29 10:56:16

UNITED NATIONS, Aug. 28 (Xinhua) -- The government of Syria on Wednesday asked the world body to investigate three alleged chemical attacks carried out by rebels in the Damascus suburbs last week, a Syrian envoy told reporters here.

"I have just addressed on behalf of my government a letter to both the secretary-general of the United Nations as well as to the president of the Security Council," said Bashar Ja'afari, Syria's permanent representative to the UN.

"The letter contains a request by the Syrian government to the secretary-general to mandate immediately the investigation team present now in Damascus to investigate three heinous incidents that took place in the countryside of Damascus on August 22, 24 and 25," Ja'afari said.

The envoy noted that members of the Syrian army inhaled poisonous gas as a result of the use by "terrorist groups" of chemical agents similar to the nerve gas sarin.

Dozens of Syrian soldiers are currently being treated in hospitals after the incidents, he added.
Farhan Haq, associate spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, confirmed later Wednesday that the United Nations had received a letter from the Syrian government on the request for additional investigation.
Haq said that the UN had not answered the Syrian government for an extension of the inspection.

"The (chemical weapons investigation) team has the ability to investigate other incidents as needed," Haq said, adding that the initial three incidents would be investigated "in due course."

On Aug. 21, the Syrian opposition claimed that some 1,300 people were killed in a chemical weapon attack carried out by the government army on militant strongholds in the suburbs of Damascus. The Syrian government strongly denied the accusation.

The UN team, led by Swedish scientist Ake Sellstrom, arrived in Syria on Aug. 18, was initially going to look into the alleged use of chemical weapons in the northern Khan al-Assal town and two other undisclosed locations.

The priority of the UN investigators for the present, however, was to investigate the latest incident involving an alleged use of chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of al-Ghouta on Aug. 21.

The U.S. President Barack Obama said Wednesday that Washington is weighing a "tailored and limited approach" against the Syrian goverment as a punishment and warning for using the banned weapons.

On what evidence does the US base it's "conclusion?"

Sent via mobile.

 

[Kaitzilla]

I was thinking of buying the writers drinks, but then I realized the scare quotes around concluded were yours.

No! I linked their story word for word.

They must have edited it. Changed their story to a different one.


Oh! Here it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...9eb726-0f89-11e3-a2b3-5e107edf9897_story.html

Even has "concluded"



Also, here is something interesting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/10/opinion/congress-must-resist-the-rush-to-war.html

Congress Must Resist the Rush to War

By Robert C. Byrd
Published: October 10, 2002

A sudden appetite for war with Iraq seems to have consumed the Bush administration and Congress. The debate that began in the Senate last week is centered not on the fundamental and monumental questions of whether and why the United States should go to war with Iraq, but rather on the mechanics of how best to wordsmith the president's use-of-force resolution in order to give him virtually unchecked authority to commit the nation's military to an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation.

How have we gotten to this low point in the history of Congress? Are we too feeble to resist the demands of a president who is determined to bend the collective will of Congress to his will -- a president who is changing the conventional understanding of the term ''self-defense''? And why are we allowing the executive to rush our decision-making right before an election? Congress, under pressure from the executive branch, should not hand away its Constitutional powers. We should not hamstring future Congresses by casting such a shortsighted vote. We owe our country a due deliberation.

11 Years later:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/opinion/bomb-syria-even-if-it-is-illegal.html?_r=1&

Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal

By IAN HURD

Published: August 27, 2013 345 Comments

EVANSTON, Ill. — THE latest atrocities in the Syrian civil war, which has killed more than 100,000 people, demand an urgent response to deter further massacres and to punish President Bashar al-Assad. But there is widespread confusion over the legal basis for the use of force in these terrible circumstances. As a legal matter, the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons does not automatically justify armed intervention by the United States.

There are moral reasons for disregarding the law, and I believe the Obama administration should intervene in Syria. But it should not pretend that there is a legal justification in existing law. Secretary of State John Kerry seemed to do just that on Monday, when he said of the use of chemical weapons, “This international norm cannot be violated without consequences.” His use of the word “norm,” instead of “law,” is telling...

This is why I love having a Democrat President.

1) Warmongering editorials
2) Hardly any news about Afghanistan/Iraq
3) Every bad piece of economic news, when it gets reported, starts out saying "unexpectedly"

 

[Rashiminos]

No! I linked their story word for word.

They must have edited it. Changed their story to a different one.


Oh! Here it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...9eb726-0f89-11e3-a2b3-5e107edf9897_story.html

Even has "concluded"

"Changing their story" seems to be going around again.

Edit: Also, congrats for reading zerohedge articles.

 

[Kaitzilla]

What about some truth squad action from xinhua news?

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-08/29/c_132673208.htm



On what evidence does the US base it's "conclusion?"

Sent via mobile.

The evidence is classified.

Only a few select members of Congress will hear it.


Much like the NSA, we should just trust the President on this.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Obama claimed he would provide proof that the Assad regime was responsible for the attack. But he has remained silent in that regard. But we now know from a leak that the only proof they apparently have is a low-level military commander "discussing the attack" in an intercepted communication.

 

[dexters]

Xinhua news is China's state news agency.
Its 'reporters' have been accused of setting up honey trap operations against Canadian politicans before and ex-Chinese spies have warned Xinhua is used as a front for espionage.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ow-beijing-targets-politicians/article547580/

So like Russia Today or Fox News, I wouldn't even use them as a source. It's not hard to go to huffpo or one of the left-leaning western media outlets to find opinion pieces and reporting that fits the anti-war/questioning narrative without stooping to using state propaganda as evidence that Assad maybe innocent of chemical weapons use.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

But we now know from a leak that the only proof they apparently have is a low-level military commander "discussing the attack" in an intercepted communication.

While circumstantial, the delivery method of the weapons appears to be via rocket, something most do not believe the rebels are capable of. Leaving just regime forces.

Assad likely isn't foolish enough to use chemical weapons, if regime forces did it, it may well have been a low-level military commander.

 

[Rashiminos]

So like Russia Today or Fox News, I wouldn't even use them as a source. It's not hard to go to huffpo or one of the left-leaning western media outlets to find opinion pieces and reporting that fits the anti-war/questioning narrative without stooping to using state propaganda as evidence that Assad maybe innocent of chemical weapons use.

What sources do you use, out of curiosity?

While circumstantial, the delivery method of the weapons appears to be via rocket, something most do not believe the rebels are capable of. Leaving just regime forces.

Maybe they were getting help?

 

[ReindeerThistle]

All "news" is propaganda by one class or another.

I am a Marxist-Leninist.

Why not use socialist sources?

Granma articles will be forthcoming.

Accusations are not proof, btw, and if you can be taken, you will be.

Capitalist countries want to go to war in Syria. Socialist nations do not.

Communism looking pretty good from where I'm standing.

Sent via mobile.

 

[dexters]

@dexter: and who is the US targeting with cruise missile attacks? There is no conclusive proof that the Syrian government did this attack.

Fair point, but we're not there yet. I'm fully able and capable of changing my opinion, but I think on a fundamental level, were arguing if intervention is needed. And in that sense, I see US involvement in this case as par for course, since Russian/chinese intervention is already underway and had been underway for sometime.

Also, citing Clinton's cruise missile attacks as precedent is hardly a case in anyone's favor. The last presidential election I voted in was 1988 and it was for Bush. Long story, you can read about it in the Ask a Red thread.

That's my sense of humour. I was going to go back to my earlier point about might-makes right when it comes to your question of who gets to decide what is appropriate.

And in many ways, this is that kind of question you can;t really answer without taking into consideration who the actor is.

The geopolitical game is hardly played the way you described except by the US. China has 200,000 medical professionals in 49 countries. Cuba has tens of thousands of doctors and teachers all over the world. Iran sent doctors to the Iraq border to help Iraq war refugees in 2003 (don't argue with me, one of our volunteers' father was on several missions until they started getting rape cases and the US forced them to leave.

South American and Caribbran nations enjoy prosperous trade relations through ALBA and Petrocarib.

It's a wide world out there. The US policy at home and abroad us "crisis management," and they jump from one fire to another.

There is certainly a better way.

Sent via mobile.

I think you're naive. There are many 'overseas' Chinese due to necessity, with many escaping communism and civil war, many of whom do not consider themselves mainlanders nor do they identify with the 'regime' there.

You're also conflating immigration/working overseas and generally the movement of people globally with state level geopolitical strategy.

Countries can be perfectly happy trading and exchanging citizens and issuing visas for each other's citizens while working in opposition on the geopolitical scale. In fact, their spy agencies rely on it.

So cultural exchanges can happen at the same time as geopolitical competition. There are over 6 million American expats BTW. Doesn't mean the US isn't playing the geopolitical game.

All "news" is propaganda by one class or another.

I am a Marxist-Leninist.

And I'm not. I choose to get my news from non-state sponsored actors. I am mindful of each source's agenda, but that's what you do in a democracy. It's my responsibility to filter and analyze the news, not take it whole from a mouthpiece.