Trouble With The Truth

Why is it politicians, of any party, feel it is okay to lie to the people they serve?  Granted there are times when it's better we not know some things to avoid panic but for the most part we deserve the truth.

The biggest and most consequential lie of the Bush administration was weapons of mass destruction.  The fall out of having pushed that lie may never be put to rest.

This administration seems to be doing it's share too.  Benghazi for starters.  All the denials that preceded departmental investigations - the IRS, the Veterans Administration, Obamacare.  Carefully, calculated lies.  Why?  To obscure departmental short comings? Or is it mere contempt for the intelligence of the public? Do they really think no one will notice?

I can't help but wonder where this mind set originates and why it's so difficult to eliminate.  Perhaps the most egregious set of untruths come from the President when he promises and fails to deliver to countries who had once been our friends.  The most recent and worst is saying Turkey will allow us to use their airports to launch strikes against ISIS. Wrong.  No such agreement has been made.

Did Susan Rice think that by saying so Turkey would be embarrassed into to doing so?  Well, whoever was behind the statement miscalculated.  Again.

The only thing that comes from such actions is a demeaning of this country and its leadership and the establishment of mistrust among our allies.  And triumph from our enemies.

If we don't want our boots on the ground in massive numbers arm the Kurds like we promised.  If we don't, there will be no boots what-so-ever.  IS will continue revising it's strategy, and like yesterday when they over ran another Iraqi Army training center, our arms will continue to fall into their hands. That's not the type of arming we should be doing.

It certainly cannot be our intent.  Can it?

I Owe Turkey An Apology

Not so long ago I wondered what kind of trade off the Turks made with IS to get their diplomats back.  Whatever it was it worked. The diplomats were freed.

Now, they're doing the work we should be doing. Plus they're going to allow foreign units to utilize their bases.  This is huge.  They're going to help the Kurds.  Where is every one else who has promised?  They're going into Syria but they won't stop with IS, they'll go after Assad.

It's too late for what ifs, but if we had punished Syria for crossing the 'red line' and armed the Free Syrian Army back when it first became an issue, a lot of what's happening now could well have been avoided.  IS would not have been able to get a foothold.

If we hadn't insisted on passing arms through the still tenuous Iraqi government, the Kurds wouldn't have to be hanging on by their nails. If we'd quit exempting ourselves from putting boots on the ground maybe others would be willing to follow suit.

What's notable to me is the Turks got their people out before taking action.  Maybe we should have tried harder to get ours out.  The failed rescue only emboldened the enemy.  One more hapless action by the no-longer-so-great-Satan.

As of right now we're being given credit for the coalition even if they're stumbling all over one another.  If Turkey takes the lead, and they are militarily capable of doing so, it will be interesting to see if the middle east participants begin to follow their lead rather than ours.

As long as IS is eliminated, I don't care who gets the credit. If Turkey leads the way we may also get Assad. That would help ease the over all situation.

The fight might turn strictly regional.  I wonder if Turkey would join forces with Israel to deny Iran their centrifuges.  It would be in both their national interests. And ours.  Perhaps we could reshuffle our interests out of the region to more friendly and less war like nations.

At some point after all that if they want to continue bickering among themselves as to who has the correct interpretation of Islam, let them go at it. Never mind the earth will be scorched beyond repair. That would be their problem.  They will have done it to themselves.

The biggest irritation to me would be watching the administration swaggering to the mic with a self congratulatory smirk claiming victory over impossible odds.  After all, the legacy must be protected no matter the cost.

We Doze, People Die

I realize there is a lot going on in Washington these days and little of it good.  The incompetence of cabinet level people is enough to take your breath away. Maybe we should have cleaned our own house before engaging in another war no matter how justified.  But we have.

We also know that our own house won't be cleaned until after the November elections if then.  Some things can't wait.  Or can they?  I haven't seen the President call Congress back to get his war vote nor have I seen them volunteer to do so.  Heanven forbid their vote may come back to haunt them in future elections.  Who cares what's right?

I hear great bragging about this marvelous coalition we've pulled together - mostly with our own enemies.  They aren't in the fight because of the inhumanity of the IS but because of their own governmental and territorial interests.

Yes.  They'll fly with us but will only hit targets of their choice, not ours.  Like us they won't put boots on the ground.  I can't help but wonder about the commitment.  Well, you say, many of them have said they would send modern arms and armor to the Kurds, the only ones willing to fight.  On the ground.  They're still waiting.  Why?  Don't give me a big song and dance about delivery logistics.  It's not that.  It's politics.  Anything that can slow involvement is being done.  After all, elections loom.

In the meantime what about the Kurds?  They're still fighting with weapons from the Soviet era.  Give them an A+ for keeping what should be in a junk pile functional.  Such as it is against the modern weaponry of IS.

The IS is annoyed with the air strikes you can be sure but they're flicking them off like an irritating fly.  They've taken cover among civilians just as Hamas did against Israel.  Of course they're basically the same.

They continue with the ethnic and religious cleansing attacking villages, hospitals and schools.  Recruiting mere children.  Beheading women they don't sell into slavery. Sending more and more refugees into Turkey who like other neighboring countries will soon find themselves on overload.

Yet our politicians continue the opposition bashing campaigns while ignoring the state of the world.  No one is pressuring the coalition to step it up, the action is in "negotiations" with Iran.

The entire world could use some leadership.  It won't happen here with this administration.  Do we really have two years to wait for someone to emerge?  The Kurds, the only ones really willing to fight, don't.

Busy Skies Over Iraq

Not to take away anything positive that's being done in the fight against IS, I must say the grand coalition has it's weaknesses.  While growing in numbers daily, they all seem to be doing the same thing.  Bombing in Iraq.  Not Syria.

There are of course reasons for this.  Syria hasn't asked for help.  Iraq has. Even though the news reports tell us the border between Iraq and Syria has been obliterated by the IS, for all practical purposes it does still exist and Syria is a sovereign nation.  To bomb in Syria requires a UN mandate which will not be forthcoming because you can be sure Russia will veto any such effort.

Why are we there?  Because of the alleged imminent plot by the Khorasan to sneak non metallic bombs on airplanes.  It's a stretch but it will do.  Of course they threatened France in the same way yet they aren't using it as an excuse to go into Syria.

That leaves us with crowded skies over Iraq, only ourselves over Syria where the IS headquarters are located, and still no boots on the ground.

To say the least, this is another ill thought out exercise which is likely to end in futility.  No one wants to send in boots if we're not willing to do so or won't admit that we actually have.  So here's another war being run, if you can call it that, by vauge goals, obfuscation and no certainty of how to get out of it when things go awry.

The salute isn't the only thing this President gets wrong.

Why Time Is Of The Essence

Yes.  There has been another beheading.  This time a French citizen by an al Qaeda splinter group in Algeria.  Why?  Because of France's part in the fight against IS.

These horrors are going to continue for several reasons I think.  One, no matter how many or who, they shock.  Which of course is the purpose. Two, the splinter groups want in on the glory of the actions so they'll play copy cat.

I cannot wonder how long it will be until some crack pot in this country gets the idea and decides to try it. Something like the way the recently well publicized Knockout Game is played. The Knockout Game, to refresh your memory is when a person attempts to knock out a random victim with one punch.  It doesn't matter if the victim is young or old, male or female, etc.  Just handy. The results have often been life threatening or worse for the victim and the perpetrator more often than not gets away. I fear someone or some group trying to make their mark might try the Beheading Game.

All that being gruesomely hashed out, let me move on.  Now that the President has progressed from pacifism to war, is there really still need to not have boots on the ground?  We already do anyway, no matter how it's couched.

I'm thinking the training of the rag tag Free Syrian Army and the inadequately armed Kurdish Pershmega troops would both be better served, along with the cause, by having our military presence in the neighborhood rather than shipping them off to another country.  We are the ones with the know how.  We should be sharing it; not denying it for an ill advised promise that has now been broken.  I won't argue semantics.  We are at war.  We do have boots on the ground. That being the case, they are in harms way.  There is no way they can be both present and beyond harm.

I do believe time is of the essence.  I understand the need for a strategy though I've yet to see one come into focus.  Too much is being held back. I realize that to eliminate the threat is not something that can be accomplished quickly but the IS forces and their friends must be made to understand that with every beheading or crucifixion or whatever other barbaric means they might employ, we will not be deterred.

The more quickly they understand this the better.  It won't happen by micromanaging and cherry picking.

One thing I do hope for the future is that we've learned it can be disastrous to ignore the reality of what's going on in the world.  Especially if the purpose is strictly political. There is no ideology be it personal or of a group that can trump truth.  Nor should it.

This War Needs Cautious Assessment

Okay.  We're not even 24 hours into what we're finally calling a war.  That we've taken the action we have is good.  That Arab countries joined in is even better even though some of them flew but did not bomb. That we hit enough IS targets in the right places to have their leadership on the run rather than being able to dig in is probably best of all.

That being said, there are a few cautionary notes.  One, there is no Plan B that we know of.  And two, there are still no boots on the ground and the time line for those willing gives IS, along with its counterparts, time to regroup before having to face those who can rout them out.

We have also learned that there has been another al Qaeda affiliate, Khorasan, which apparently had plans for an imminent attack on us.  Where did they come from?  We're now told they've been around for some time.  Shouldn't we know about them or have they been brought to mind merely to give cover for our bombing strikes? Giving those strikes legitimacy because of plans and a group we knew nothing about.

It's the convolution that's frustrating. Knowing now that they do exist along with so many others that are like minded, to win the battle against the extremist mind set is going to take more than cheering one night of attacks.  We still don't know who all is in the coalition and what each has promised to do.  It's a political nightmare for all of them.

I think it important to remember part of what's at stake here and why we need to be wholly involved.  While it isn't our fight alone, someone has to lead it. And it's not just a fight against IS.  It's a fight against pure evil and for human decency.  It's in all against not only the worst of the worst like IS, but also the likes of Assad, Putin, Kim Jong-un, the Iranian Mullahs and all like minded dictators.

It's a fight to show them their inhumanity will not be tolerated by the rest of the world.  If only it were so.  If it were there  would be far less reluctance even without the strong leadership we used to provide. As it is each participant has to search their own conscience and proceed as cohesively as possible. Hopefully, one day, our leadership will return but it won't be soon and the world cannot wait.

Expect a few burps along the way while an incomplete strategy shakes out.  Hope the President allows himself to listen to those who know better than he what is necessary for victory. Micromanaging it will doom it.

Remember too, it isn't principled war we Americans are against, it's not being allowed to win those wars.   Don't under estimate our determination when the goal is just and coherent. We can and will win. It's what Americans do.

If Not Us, Who?

There is a great column in today's NY Times  by Roger Cohen titled The Great Unraveling .  It is an unnerving summation of the world circumstance as it stands today.

It seems the world has ceased to know how to function in unity no matter  how dire the straits we face. The Russians have become aggressive,  Israel is in an uneasy cease fire with terrorists, Syria continues its civil war while the country implodes, the British are facing a major reshaping of their empire and our government is dithering about how much aid should be given to a region in dire need because one part of it hasn't formed a government of which it approves.

What has happened to us?  What difference what these people call themselves.  Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, The Islamic State, what ever!  They are all cut from the same piece of cloth.  Radical Islam. Their creed is all the same and eventually they will band together under one banner, that which is the most successful at achieving the goal they all share.

It isn't which group is more of a threat to us that should be the consideration.  It's the movement as a whole.  It must be destroyed and dithering doesn't get it done.  The way everyone is acting you'd think time is of no essence.  Heaven forbid we don't solve all the potential political ramifications before actually making a decision!

To Hell with politics.  Why can't we just do what's right.  The military has been quite vocal about what is needed.  The Powell Doctrine.  Hit hard, win and leave.  Win is the key word here.  No more pussy footing around, no more toying with populations.

The regional problems are going to remain.  They've been going on for centuries.  But we must let all those concerned within and outside of the region there is a limit as to what the civilized world will tolerate.

We will not tolerate madmen annihilating others merely because they believe differently when it comes to politics or religion.  We will not tolerate the capture, rape and selling of women. Nor the lashing of them nor stoning them to death. We will not tolerate the slaughter of innocent children because of their own or their parent's religion. We will not tolerate the inhuman executions of their captives, no matter nationality nor religion.

If they want to live in their tribal enclaves so be it.  We will not force democracy on them.  We will demand, however, that they emerge from their caves into the daylight of human decency and civilized behavior.

Should they continue to choose not to, we will eliminate them.  Pure and simple.  Expediently and timely.  You say war is uncivilized?  No.  What's uncivilized is the unwillingness to have the courage of our convictions.  Drastic actions call for drastic means.  Some one has to take charge.  It should be us leading the way.  Unfortunately it is not.  Courage is no longer in the vocabulary of politics.

And the enemy knows it.

It IS Our War

Listening to the Sunday morning Talk shows I note that the Democrats are still espousing the President's strategy and the Republican are saying it's not enough.

A couple of things occurred to me after hearing that a British aid worker has joined the ranks of sacrificial lambs to western politics.

Two arguments go against the grain that it's a regional war and those in the region have to sort it.

First conventional borders have been erased by the new State.  It is coming perilously close to obliterating even more - Jordan and Turkey, who incidentally is a Shiria state want-to-be under Erdogan.

The once assumed safe haven of Baghdad you'll note is surrounded by them making the formation of an all inclusive Iraqi state more difficult than it has been already.

That covers the territorial part of the argument.

Now for personnel.  You'll remember the first two deaths were American journalists.  The third a Brit and the fourth, another Brit, is fingered.  Remember they hold Italians and Turkish diplomats too.  They seem to be choosing those who have a connection with the military as their first victims no matter it may have been from generations back.  An excuse is an excuse.  Don't think for one minute that when they run out of captives that have any sort of military history they'll not turn to who ever is left.

Back to my argument.  Americans and Brits. That alone should make it ours.  But more than that consider how many foreign nations are in the middle east in ongoing business ventures.  I remember when my husband was working for both an oil company then an electronics firm where his travels took him.  Damascas, Beirut, Israel to mention a few plus a good number of South American countries.  Those were days of relative peace but I can recall his stories of kids playing soccer with military rifles slung over their shoulders. This is what it has escalated into.

The radical groups who do not call themselves ISIL and are operating in different territory will feed off of its success.  What happens when business or oil patch workers are captured and paraded out for execution?  Are we going to say it's a British problem if they are Brits?  Or Canadian or Italian or Swiss or whatever?

The politicians cannot quit playing politics even when human lives are at stake. People who care more about truth and compassion than politics are the ones losing their lives.  Meanwhile in Washington, the dreary beat goes on.

When they won't face up to the facts about our own border, I don't expect they'll ever face up to the facts elsewhere.

They don't want our boots on the ground.  How about a bunch of $800 wingtips?  They'll quickly learn the reality of not having skilled leadership and forces to back them up!

There Are Always Consequences

The Presiden'ts "speech" is now in the history books.  The critics are out in full force and unfortunately they seem to be outnumbering the supporters.  It's a bad news situation no matter how you look at it.

First we have a President at odds with his own words.  He presented a plan of sorts with so many holes in it you can't blame Congress for being reluctant to open the check book or voice support.  On the other hand, if they don't the world as we know it will disintegrate before our eyes.

There comes a time when war is necessary.  To worry about legacy above need is pathetic and foolhardy.  The time to worry about legacy should have been before the country was diminished in the eyes of the world by arrogant and dismissive actions toward our allies. They owe us nothing.  Why put their own in harms way when they have good reason to doubt we have their back?

The turmoil in our politics here at home adds to the image of weak leadership.  We want, now, for the world to follow our lead.  What lead?  We want the easy part.  The air strikes.  We want everyone else to commit to the hard part.  Boots on the ground.  Even though the threat is at their door, why would they want to follow a "leader" who is less than committed in the first place?

Now it will be politics as usual.  The parsing of words.  Struggling with who has the authority to do what. Heaven forbid anything interfere with mid term campaigning!

In the meantime ISIL or whatever - I think now the Islamic State is most accurate - continues on it's determined pursuit of followers, territory and mayhem.  The longer we wait or nibble around the edges, the worse it will get.  What happens when the British aid worker loses his head?  Or one of the Turkish diplomats the "State" holds?

Israel is always reminding the world to remember the holocaust and vow never again.  They show their determination daily in their fight with Hamas.  Expand on that while remembering Hamas is cut from the same cloth as the State.  How did it start?  With the world dismissing a seemingly insignificant little bully of a man with huge ambition.

How is this starting? With the world dismissing what they suppose is little more than a collection of malcontents in rag tag armies bent on mischief?  Some mischief.

The situation gives new meaning to the saying, "Move it or lose it".  It's time to move it!

The Speech - Now What?

I listened to the President's speech and was left wondering, now what?  It proved to be pretty much what I expected.  A lot of flourish with little detail.

In the President's defense, there is only so much he could tell.  For instance, the question that arose about what would happen when and if a fighter pilot is shot down over Syria or in ISIS territory.  How would we get him out before he suffered the same fate or worse than our two journalists? I'd like to think the top brass have a handle on that though it's a tough one.

What really worries me is the time line.  I know it can't be an exact, but by the time we get the troops in Iraq re-trained and the Free Syrian Army up to snuff so that there will be "boots on the ground"to help the Kurds ISIS will have had ample time to do far more damage than already done.

An aside on the Free Syrian Army that the President so blithely called inadequet because they are no more than pharmicists and technicians, I'd like to remind him it's the same stuff from which our reserves and National Guard are made and they've done an exemplary job!

What he presented is a piece meal strategy at best in a war that can't be won that way.  Every time we stall or drag our feet, Iran continues toward it's nuclear goal and ISIS towards it's goal of literally slaughtereing all who do not agree with them.

Telling us how great our economy is and how great we are does nothing toward warding off more of the jihadist aggressiveness what's more destroying them.

My feeling is he said what was written for him to say in an effort to get the country behind increased military involvement into which he has been forced.  It's not so much that we are tired of war as they constantly tell us, but that he is.  He doesn't want to deal with anything that doesn't fit into his 21st century vision for the world.  For the world, not of the world.  Because he cannot.  The world is far different than he would have it and he has trouble with that concept. His way to deal with it is to ignore it.

Unfortunately ignoring reality doesn't change it.  One can hope he gets a coalition that's willing to fight.  So far no one else, other than the Kurds, are willing to help the boots on the ground movement.  Going to the UN Security Council will do nothing but make public the ridicule and wrath of Russia and China.

What I see in all this is a struggle within himself as to whether he must follow the counsel of his advisors or continue to follow his own.  If past history is any indication he'll follow his own.  Our enemies will continue on their current paths.  Nothing will change to a meaningful degree while this President is in office short of an actual attack within the borders of the United States.

By the time a new President takes office, the world problem will be far worse than it is today.  Obama will walk away from it probably still blaming Bush.  I wonder if the new President will blame Obama six years into his/her presidency.

Unfortunately a belated blame game does no good other than to divide. Facing the issue and acting on  it in a timely manner is what is needed. The speech was nice. Unless he follows through in that timely manner, it will all have been for naught.

As a footnote, might I add Congress would do well to quit playing politics with it and also do what is required of them in the same timely manner.  Elections be damned.

Hamas Doesn't Want Peace

The carnage in Gaza has made me wince and sorely tested my backing of Israel of late.  However, with all the cease fires violated by Hamas I've stayed strong.

I appreciate the fact that our Secretary of State is trying to do some good though he's chosen one more task at which he cannot succeed. Let's face it. Hamas does not want peace.

If you've been following the conflict you know it's in their charter to destroy the Israeli state.  Unfortunately for them and the people they hold in their grip Israel has a far superior war machine which they've not hesitated to use.

Today, however, seems to be the last straw.  With a 72 hour cease fire in hand in order to get the right mix of negotiators to Egypt, Hamas just could not contain themselves. They fired rockets, once more into Israel, killed two Israeli soldiers and kidnapped and Israeli officer. Yes, according to reports, four more Palestinians were killed.  They won't be the last.  On either side.

When you look back at history and realize the land which is now Israel was carved out of other territories by Europeans who didn't even live in the region the conflict is understandable.  This is probably the most graphic illustration of unintended consequences of good intentions.  You can understand the bitterness.  It seems the whole region is bitter and I don't see it changing in our lifetime. Hate has become a way of life.  How do you change it?  We can't.  And until and unless those involved realize the unending killing solves nothing it won't end.

Perhaps it's time to let them fight it out among themselves.  You say the odds aren't even?  Well, that's war.  Let's face it, we cannot get inside their heads to displace that bitterness and hate and trying seems to do no more than build resentment against us.  We have more than enough already.  We haven't yet learned how to defend our interests without antagonizing others.  It's called diplomacy which is an art foreign to those currently trying to practice it.  Scolding, dictating and empty threats don't cut it.

War is a horrible way to solve anything but when hatred runs so deep there is little else.  One can only say that the oxymoron of all this taking place in the land which is sacred to both sides makes me, at least, question just about everything about human nature as a whole and it's relation to cultural differences.

I'm no longer sure of what I believe any more.

Obama Has The Sadim Touch

What is the Sadim Touch?  The opposite of the Midas Touch. Where everything that is touched is turned into a mess.

In some respects perhaps we should be glad Obama has turned out to be a bystander President rather than a leader.  Everything he touches is either a pending disaster or an unmitigated mess.

Consider Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, Benghazi, the NSA, violating reporter's privacy,  and now the ACA. Not just the roll out, but the consequences of poorly written and unread legislation  paired with too many "the Secretary shall"s. These are but a few of the unmitigated messes.

The pending disasters are more far reaching in that they are global.  Syria, where Assad gave up his chemical weapons in order to be able to continue slaughtering his people. Since Assad didn't really need them it was no punishment. Not following through on arming the once good guys thus allowing the extremists to gain a foothold.

Cutting off aid to Egypt because of the misguided assumption that because Morsi was duly elected he should remain in office no matter the increasingly dictatorial stance he was taking.

Libya.  What more needs to be said.  Over a year later no arrests for the consulate attack while the press has had a multitude of interviews with those involved.

And now he's about to ease sanctions on Iran with nothing in return.  No freeze on enrichment.  No dismantling of centrifuges.  Leaving everything in place for Iran's nuclear program to continue. Something that has been going on since June, actually.

So what happens now? No one has considered any of the U.S. actions in the middle east to be wise.  Essentially everyone will fend for themselves.  The Taliban in Pakistan has elected the man who threatened school girl Malala as their new leader. Iran will get its nuke.  Pakistan has agreed to sell nukes to Saudi Arabia. Saudi will continue arming the rebels in Syria.  Russia may provide the nuke for Syria if deemed  advantageous.  Jordan will probably fall,  Hamas and Hezbollah will be strengthened.  Iraq will lose out to Iran as will Afghanistan to the Taliban. Al Qaeda will continue to run rampant and spread across Somalia, the Sudan and throughout the weaker African states.

Then there is Israel. With friends like us they don't need enemies! Whatever they choose to do be sure we will not be forewarned.  We have opposed them, besmirched them and finally betrayed them.

All because Obama needed to divert attention from the ACA in an attempt to save his administration from total collapse.  What a trade off. Every mid eastern expert in the world takes exception to our policies if thats what you want to call them.  Peace in our time?  Not by this President's hand.

Unless the negotiations in Geneva come to a total stand still you'll hear the other shoe we've been waiting for - drop.

When Foreign Policy Is Foreign To The Policy Makers

It seems to me we still have no foreign policy.  While the Syrians have handed over their list of chemical weapons sites I can't help but wonder what's next.  Why is Iran all of a sudden getting so chummy by hinting they might talk and offering to moderate a peace process in Syria.  Russia seems to be coordinating all this nicey, nicey stuff and I don't trust it one bit.  I hope our government doesn't either.

This is so unlike our adversaries I wonder if they've come up with some new type of weapon or strategy of which we have no idea.  Therefore making nice about the current situation will have no lasting consequence. If we have a foreign policy we'd have a contingency.  Just in case. Do we?  I doubt it.

If indeed we don't it may be better for those who are warring. We've done Afghanistan no favors by decimating their country, losing the battle with the Taliban and pulling out before business is finished.

I've taken outgoing President Karzi to task multiple times for his corruption and complaints about the truths of war - that innocents get killed.  On the other hand, his frustration is understandable because in many ways we're leaving his country more vulnerable than it was before we went looking for bin Laden and ended up trying to appease the Taliban and the war lords.

They, the Taliban, have become far more aggressive as we've begun pulling our troops.  Though coalition forces are still suffering casualties, the percentage is far lesser than those being suffered by the still under trained Afghan army and police forces. Those casualties are three times higher than they were in 2010 and 2011.

Karzai reads those casualty reports but does not release them for concerns about morale. He mourns the fact they are all Afghans and he sees it getting worse, not better.

You see, as we leave we are also pulling our assets.  No more state of the art field hospitals.   No more med evac choppers.  Yet the enemy hasn't any fewer roadside bombs or ied's with which to attack.  And attack they do, under trained soldiers who are now deserting rather than facing what to them seems certain death.

Unintended consequences?  Not really.  Just a lack of sound policy and no forethought nor will to remedy it.

The lesson learned for this country, and I thing we've learned it even if the government hasn't.  Don't get into a war unless and until you know what you're doing and why. We're not the only ones who are hurt by cavalier decisions.

Mr. President, Stop Beating The Drums Of War

I cannot believe that the President is already taking credit for something he had nothing to do with other than to not forbid John Kerry to talk with Russia.  That the threat of force has brought about this impasse with Syria.

Come on. He was no where near getting Congressional approval for credible force nor was the force he proposed exactly credible. A pinprick?  Unbelievably small?

That Putin grabbed onto a flip statement by Kerry and parlayed it into a framework for action is all we've gotten and all we're likely to get. Advantage Putin.  Advantage Syria.

We have no idea what  discussions Putin has had with Syria nor what they agreed to.  We do know Syria's civil war continues as well as the game of hide and seek with chemical weapons.

We know military action will be off the table in any U.N. Resolution as well as our arming of the rebels.  Putin will see to that.  So what is it we really have?  A frame work.  For what?

So why, oh why, are you trying to convince Iran that diplomacy paired with the threat of force will make them give up their nuclear program.  Especially since Putin is already in arms talk with them.

You undercut your own Secretary of State with your dithering.  You have completely demoralized the Free Syrian Army who desperately need weapons and our own military is exhausted with trying to keep up with your will we or won't we.  Congress is skeptical at best and the American people have probably tuned you out.

It is unbelievably unbecoming for you to be taking credit for what little has been accomplished.  If indeed anything has.  I'd think you'd have the good graces to keep your mouth shut or if you have to talk, give Kerry an "A" for effort! To you I give an "F" for false  and probably foolish bravado.

Not long ago when asked if you could change your approval rating with a speech you said you were good, but not that good.  Then you added you were still, pretty good.

No sir.  Sorry. You are not.

The Waiting Game

There was nothing in Obama' speech last night that came as a surprise.  Actually it was a rehash of what has been said before.

So where does it leave us?  As an insignificant entity whose leader abdicated our position as leader of the free world.  Instead we are now bowing to the dictates of Russia whatever they may be.

Military action has been delayed which is what the President wanted even though he wasn't going to have much say in it anyway. However, it hasn't necessarily been avoided because we'll be jumping through the same hoops when Iran is ready to go nuke.  With even less support than we have at present.

The worst part of it is Assad will go unpunished because Russia will protect him.  That wasn't the President's intent either though I have yet to figure out why. Assad still has his chemical weapons.  Removing them will take months if not years and who can trust Syria to give them all up? And who can guarantee he won't use them again while all the "negotiations" are going on?

So what has our bluster left in it's wake?  A demoralized Free Syrian Army who most likely would have been the good guys at the beginning.  Now there is so much al Qaeda infiltration into rebel ranks we haven't a clue who is a safe bet.

We have ancient, historic Christian communities being destroyed by these rebels and the citizens who refuse to embrace Islam being beheaded.  Are chemical weapons worse?

We have Assad left unchecked to carry on with his civil war.  That's an oxymoron isn't it? Civil War? Russia will keep him well armed and those caught in the cross fire will continue to die.

Meanwhile our people will meet with Russia's people and try to sort things out. To suit Russia and Syria and the U.N. will wait to see which way the wind blows before coming up with their own resolution.

Meanwhile, the country that should be dictating the terms for the surrender of WMDs, the U.S.,  is sitting, begging and rolling over to Putin's commands.  Will he even throw us a bone?  I doubt it.

Tony Blair was chastised for being Bush's poodle.  What does that make Obama to Putin?  Maybe a chihuahua?  Well, at least he's got the ears for it.

Don't Pop The Champagne Corks Just Yet

You could almost hear the collective sighs of relief when Vladimir Putin seized on an off hand remark by John Kerry and ran with it. That Syria give up it's chemical weapons, ingredients, etc. to the international community to eventually be destroyed.  Standing alone it is a noble endeavor.  But it does not stand alone.

Why do I think ole Vlad has something more up his sleeve than one upping our President one more time?  Because I don't trust him.  Because I don't trust Assad.  Nor am I thrilled with the competency of the U.N. And because this isn't as easy an undertaking as the media are making it seem.  The big factor is there is a civil war going on in Syria. I hardly think Assad is going to neglect it while he gives up his chemical weapons.

I am going to listen to the President tonight with a great deal of interest.  I, as many others, think he sees this as his out.  Again, it isn't that easy.  Of course the Russians have to bring forth their proposal.  Like the watchdogs are going to be and what demands he will make on the U.S.

Then there's how they're going to get the weapons out of Syria amid a war and how they will verify all have been removed amid a war.  No easy task.

I suggest the President set a deadline for the proposal in the very near term or this could drag out until the desert freezes over.  He should never, ever take military action off the table.  He does, however, need to learn how to use it judiciously.  He's been given a reprieve on that one.

There are nearly as many caveats to the Russian proposal as to the President's call for missile strikes.  A best case scenario would be a discussion with the American people as to what the new wrinkles are that this proposal has brought to the table.  And that the President doesn't try to claim the idea as his own and try to make himself into the visionary statesman that he is not.

No doubt I will have a few things to say tomorrow.  It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings and at the moment there isn't a lady in sight - fat or otherwise.

The Process As Part Of The Problem

Listening to the should we or shouldn't we arguments as to whether or not to strike Syria is gut wrenching.  I do understand the argument that Assad should be punished, meaningfully, for using chemical weapons.

I also understand the reluctance to aide the opposition since, regardless of what John Kerry says, we're really not all that sure who the good guys are.  If there are any.  We do know that they're not going to like us no matter what we do.

I still maintain that the time for successful intervention is long passed and whether we engage in a full fledged war, a shot across the bow or somewhere in between we're going to come out on the short end.

However, we are contemplating military action of some sort.  In listening to Diane Feinstein, D-CA, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I thought it strange she emphasized that she was very constituently oriented.  Isn't she supposed to be? But then we know how few that have been in Congress as long as she has actually are.

More than that however, she admitted that the negative response she has received about any military intervention  is causing her consternation. Then she went on to caveat that with the fact the public doesn't know what she does. To be precise, "But you see, then they don't know what I know.  They haven't heard what I've heard."

Why not?  Everyone knows we intercept communication from every one every where.  That's no longer a secret.  What should we not be privy to when the President is contemplating taking us into the abyss of military action?  Let us decide with clarity rather than guilt or fear.  Leave that to the President.  He's so good at it.

What could be more childish than the way this is being handled.  "It's not my fault, it's yours!"  "I know something you don't know." And so it goes. But we're talking about war.  Lives.  Obscene amounts of money we don't have to spare.

One more thing to bear in mind.  Nine eleven is but 5 days away. Last year we had Benghazi.  The entire truth of that matter has yet to be told.  Do we want to add Syria to the mix?

What A Mess

As expected the Senate has passed a resolution that will lead us to war if passed by the House.

It amazes me how the scope of blame for the Syrian action, and we the people haven't seen proof that it was the regime rather than a radical wing of the rebels who actually unleashed the chemicals, has spread from our President's inaction to the fault of the whole world including Congress.

So what's next?  Who knows but I'm willing to wager it will be more than outlined in the resolution.

I have embedded it for your reading pleasure.  I get uncomfortable with the very first sentence and it goes on from that point.  There are too many vagaries for my comfort zone.

That being said, I just don't trust this President to limit himself to what is laid out.  Since he is comfortable enforcing law as he sees fit rather than obeying thir dictates,  I have no reason to believe he will abide by any ole resolution coming out of Congress if it suits his purpose to not do so.

Now I read where the Arabs are willing to  finance the entire war if we will fight it.  Wow.  Heck of a deal. If it's true.  Why don't they fight it themselves.  The United States military is not a mercenary group that hires itself out!  Is it?

I see escalation written all over this. I'm tired and afraid.  Tired of trying to make sense of this administration and afraid for every member of the military and their families.  I think I'm stressed.  I cannot begin to imagine what they're going through.  And for what?

________________________________________________________________

Syria Joint Resolution

Congress On Syria - What I Hope To See

Parsing words seems to becoming a required skill for politicians.  That Obama is going to seek Congressional approval for military action is good. When his surrogates go to lay out his proposal I hope they hold his feet to the fire. Don't accept parsed rhetoric.

It's a given that chemical weapons  have been used in spite of international agreements banning that use.  It's also true that red line had been crossed several times before Obama felt forced to take action to save face.  I do not accept his rationale that this time is because of the scope of it.  Use of chemical weapons is just that - large or small.  But this President has a penchant for picking and choosing to his own liking.

I've already made clear that I think token action is a waste of time and to the world, laughable.  Some Senators say we need to do more.  We all know what that means.  The US will be involved in escalating an already untenable situation.

That's the big thing to remember.  This isn't about the misuse of the Presidential bully pulpit.  It's about whether or not we should involve ourselves in a fight that isn't ours, with but one reluctant ally, France, who won't act without us.  It's fair to ask our allies why the lack of support.  I've yet to hear that, but I'd guess at least partially they're as war weary, especially since we don't tend to win them these days, as we are. Why isn't the chemical weapon use as egregious to them?

If the administration briefings to Congress as to the complete strategy is better given in private, I can live with it.  But it must be a complete strategy including what exactly our national interest is in all this, how we will extricate ourselves and what we'll do if the action doesn't deter Assad.  They should also ask what we'll do if Israel is attacked in retaliation for our actions and what we'll do if Russia decides to jump in on the side of the Syrians and also why our allies have all but rejected this tack.

I'm sure, given time, I'll think of more, but you get the idea.  It must be detailed and thorough, doable and meaningful.  So far I've seen none of the above.  What I have seem is impassioned rhetoric about the need for some action because of horrors of war that we are no part of and an opinion that no one seems to share, in an attempt to make us feel guilty for not being willing to bail out the President.

The President's Statement - My Take

I took something far different from both the President's statement this morning and John Kerry's yesterday than most pundits.

I saw in both the hint, perhaps obscure, that given any chance to avoid it no action will be taken.  Both alluded to negotiation as being the only real way to solve the Syrian problem.  It was well camouflaged by the outrage over the use of poison gas on the people of Syria.

Politicians seem to be divided as to whether or not we should take military action. I'm against it as put forth by the President.  A token missile strike seems a costly and ineffective way to rap Assad's knuckles. My inclination is to stay out of it.

We've so often been accused  of trying to be the arbiter of the world's behavior.  There is truth in it and when it comes to war we've been pretty choosy about where and with whom we should involve ourselves.  Wars in the World web site shows just how many wars are currently being waged and where. Where have we been on any of them? National interest and security has been parsed to fit the moment, not the actuality.

The question that comes to mind is whether or not there is any one way to die in war that's better than any other?  Death is death and in war there is no humane methodology.  Be it poison gas, bombs, bullets or being hacked to death with machetes it's horrible.  The use of one particular method seems to me not to be the reason to insert ourselves if we're not willing to put forth the effort to end it.  Recent history shows our shortcomings in that area.

Well, what about the children?  The casualty figure for the Syrian civil war is somewhere around 100,000 people and climbing.  How many of those casualties were children?  Why aren't we just as outraged about them?  Also, when it comes to touting statistics, I haven't seen a breakdown of that 100,000 as to how many were loyalists and how many rebels or which rebels or women, children and the elderly. They're no more than a head count of the dead.

With the President delaying any action until after Congress debates and votes gives him some wiggle room behind the tough rhetoric.  It also gives Assad time to either disperse his weapons and their delivery systems and/or surround them with human shields. And don't forget he has the support of both Russia and Iran. That doesn't bode well for us.

If we launch missiles into Syria there is no guarantee that we won't be hitting civilians ourselves.  Look at what Karzai does in Afghanistan every time we do.  What do you think Assad will do?  And does that not put us on the same plane as Syria with only the weapon being different?

We say we're war weary.  The President says he's war weary.  Surely with all the consulting of experts he is supposedly doing someone must have a viable idea of how to dissuade Assad with out getting physically involved in his dirty little war.

A token strike would be no more than token punishment which will be met with distain and lower the President's credibility even further.  A President with no credibilty among either enemies, allies  or onlookers is the real threat to our national security.  On that basis we truly are threatened and there's not a  token missile launch that can be made that will alter that dynamic.