France Stands Alone in Support of Syria Attack

France Stands Alone in Support of Syria Attack

France pledged Friday to join U.S. military action against Syria should President Obama give the attack order to punish the regime of President Bashar al-Assad for its alleged use of chemical weapons.

Secretary of State John Kerry quickly hailed the pledge from “our oldest ally,” a reference to French support of the American Revolution. The commitment from France came as support for the U.S. was wavering after the stunning vote by the British Parliament Thursday against the use of force in Syria. “We are not alone,” Kerry said.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said just before the British vote that “it is the goal of President Obama and our government, whatever decision is taken, that it be an international collaboration and effort.”

Hagel was returning from meetings with Asian defense ministers in Brunei and was expected to be in Washington late Friday for final planning on what appeared to be an imminent attack.

At a State Department briefing, Kerry also referenced support from the Arab League, Turkey and other allies, but that support has only come in the form of backing for the U.S. charges that Assad’s forces used chemical weapons.

Turkey and Jordan, both close U.S. allies, have ruled out the use of force and also have said that their territory would not serve as “launching pads” for attacks on Syria. U.S. efforts to gain international backing for action at the United Nations have been blocked by Russia and China.

In Denmark on Friday, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the alliance had no plans to intervene in Syria, which would require the approval of all 28 of its members.

Earlier this week, French President Francois Hollande said that “France is ready to punish those who took the vile decision to gas innocent people.”

Hollande went further in remarks Friday to the French daily Le Monde, stating that “France wants action that is in proportion and firm against the Damascus regime. There are few countries that have the capacity to inflict a sanction by the appropriate means. France is one of them. We are ready.”

Hollande appeared to be referring to the SCALP cruise missiles in the inventory of the French Air Force. The SCALP missiles, launched from French Rafale or Mirage 2000 attack aircraft as standoff weapons, were used in the allied attacks on Libya in 2011.

In the case of Syria, the SCALP cruise missiles could be used in concert with hundreds of Tomahawk cruise missiles aboard five U.S. destroyers now patrolling in the eastern Mediterranean.

The SCALPs have a range of about 630 miles and carry a 650-pound conventional warhead. Testing on a version of the SCALP for the French navy began last month.

Moscow’s Interfax news agency said Thursday that Russia was sending two warships to the eastern Mediterranean but Russian officials stressed that the ships were not meant to counter the U.S. naval buildup.

The Russian ships, a missile cruiser and an anti-submarine ship, were expected to arrive in the eastern Mediterranean in “the coming days,” Interfax said.

Russia, Syria’s main international ally and financial backer, has charged that the chemical attacks blamed on Assad’s forces were more likely the result of attacks by rebel forces.

The divide between the U.S. and Russia on Syria will be on display next week when President Obama arrives Tuesday in St. Petersburg for an economic summit that will also be attended by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Tags: , , ,

Join the Conversation

Of all the countries that need to be in on-board, & majorly, is Turkey. They have an intense relation with Syria along their mutual border, & has, most probably, the largest & best equipped military in this region. Turkey has a “dog in the hunt”, so they should be stepping up.…

Tomahawks + SCALP EG + Al Qaeda fighters = Hard Times for President Bashar al-Assad.

They won’t because they are run by “The Muslim Brotherhood” and have internal problems of their own, like the majority of the population not being very happy with the continued creep to a Islamic Dictatorial run state. Instead of the democratically elected state most of the population thought they were voting for. Just like what happened in Egypt, and the Ruling Government don’t want the same results ( Being Removed from Power ).

France.….. Interesting that they support military action, but also say they might not furnish any of the team players.…

France..The NFL Cheerleaders for Team America World Police..

u ain’t never been “in country” if u can say that!

Yeah, you can depend on the Frogs to be Frogs…they usually wait to see our position and then take the opposite one

PHP — The more I think about what France is pulling off, the more I find it utterly repulsive.… France, the former “world power” is more than happy for the U.S. to take action, but not to bloody their hands. What hypocrisy! .…… Then I thought, but why? They have an Army (But only the Foreign legion is used overseas), they have a Navy, they have an Air Force.… So why?.….Is it because France has one of the largest Muslim populations in Europe? .… Is it because France’s vocal Muslim population is mostly radicals?.… Syria is a former French colony.. If France is so taken aback by the events there, then have the balls to jump into the fray. If not, then shut the hell up, and just shiver in the corner.…

The USA. A superpower, in the Westernmost hemisphere. Who, ideally, has nothing at all to do in the middle east, and should focus on the atlantic and pacific regions, and it’s southern ‘new world’ neighbours. Instead of getting a sort of European Union established in the entire ‘Americas’, in which it would be the BIG DOG (dumb right wing Americans would think this somehow usurps their ‘sovereignty’, is now trying to do something in Syria. Obama, who isn’t a war monger, is being giantly pressured into ‘acting’. So let’s see; pathetic France and England pressured the US into acting, and are now backing off themselves. That little boy Cameron just got his pants pulled down by his own parliament. If Obama strikes now, even if just a few airstrikes, he loses all credibility as a non-warmonger. The US gets some more hate from the world. And Assad will have a more unified population. Guess what: the rebels will win anyway, give it time. Why would the US meddle now? Just keep upping your oil and gas production, invest some in jobs creation and it’ll be fine. Why mess in Syria in which no possible plausible scenario is attractive?

The US shouldn’t be isolationist, I agree, but it shouldn’t be ‘interventionist’ either. Not to allege racism here, but when millions of Africans butchered each other with MACHETES, you didn’t lift a finger. That would have been humanitarian. But hell, we know America;s history with blacks. Now in Syria we have a civil WAR, in which WELL ARMED civilians are fighting the government and are making great strides left and right, suddenly this is a very big ‘humanitarian crisis’.

Even Israel should know better (guess who’s pressuring Obama). Does Israel like to have perpetual instability in that prison region they’ve created? Or better to have a ‘known evil’ like Assad who hasn’t done anything to them and won’t?

I bet ya in a few years the entire region will be supplying suicide bombers to Haifa and Tel Aviv. But maybe that’s what Israel likes as a pretext to many things.

concerned european.…chill out.…U.S. isn’t going to do anything..too chicken shat to do anything but blow thier big fat mouths.…take Obama for example.….now thats chicken shat

I’ve never seen anything like this. First France and England pressure the US into acting, and then they backtrack themselves. Very odd state of affairs. There is something wrong. Syria might be the straw that broke the camel’s back, meaning the middle east will become a complete clusterF, Iraq isn’t as stable as a year ago. Iran is completely grasping at straws. If this happens, it might unite anti-western opposition again. Something is wrong here.

Ps: If just a few air strikes and cruise misiles, why bother at all. Why does America want to be called the great Satan and warmonger for the next 30 years just to throw a few missiles and bombs? Save those names for actual invasions, which I’m sure you guys will come up with in a decade or 2. Gotta keep the MIC oiled and well.

There is some truth to what you say. We just can’t keep our Military Industrial Complex in check. We have to find someone to attack.….Watch out Grand Cayman Islands…

It’s too bad the UN was outdated the day they were organized, What have they done in all the emergencies that have popped up all their years. Just sit and talk about it, like now here is a Syrian leader killing all his people, doesn’t the UN give a shit about it? NO. All the UN is, is a huge bullshit organization supposedly trying for world peace — SHOW ME.

The UN is a league of nations DAVE. It’s a bond of almost all the nations in the world. Mostly they do humanitarian things, help progress education, health care and help get people out of poverty. (pretty much only facsist dictators and republicans disagree with those things).

Now when it comes to wars and military interventions, those things (as any governning body the UN has a way to pass resolutions etc) have to be AGREED UPON DEMOCRATICALLY. Like the US senate, or our parliaments. And member states of the Security Council all have VETO powers. Yes? So, if, like sadly most, countries are in the ‘national security interest’ of some of those USSC members, resolutions become difficult to pass. Libya in ’11 was a notable exception, as was KOREA in 1950(different cirsumstances). Educate yourself Dave. John Bolton is a cancer, his words are NOT meaningful.

>Why would the US meddle now?

Two words: chemical weapons

And since there are no right answer to that problem, what should be done? Doing nothing will just set up a very bad precedent. Especially with the timing chosen by Assad: right in the UN face! But what to expect from an organisation that got communist as member?

At the end of the day, I do not understand why there are not any announcement of humanitarian relief, especially to allied country like Jordan whom are literally flooded by refugees.

From a theoretical absolute neutral point of view, Israel is at least as much backed by United States as Syria is by Russia. Sure Israel never gazed its own population, but it has a controversy of its own.

Look like a deadlock to me. Will the UN survive and what will “United Nations” mean the day China will be the #1 economical power?

>.…..but when millions of Africans butchered each other with MACHETES, you didn’t lift a finger.

I am not sure that you realize how horrific a chemical weapon is. So horrible that generations has made efforts to make sure that we never see from our eyes how ugly it can be. In chemistry, we are molecules; and then come a substance named “sarin” or “Vx” that have an effect on it; you’re death.

At the end of the day, imposing peace is a form of dictatorship, just like deciding of the fate of another country … in the name of peace. What is peace without liberty?

Your entire premise stands or falls based upon weather you consider your nation, with your tax dollars, to be the policeman of the world. Let me give you a push in one direction: you bomb a few sites and go back (Obama doesn’t want a neocon war), this happens: they cry for more action and more action. Republicans will have his head if he doesn’t ‘secure all chem weapons’. Such things are pipe dreams, everybody knows, but the UNinformed american public will think: yeah sounds reasonable: let’s have Obama ‘SECURE ALL CHEMICAL WEAPONS’. That would mean a ground invasion of 100k plus troops. So Obama is doing DUMB thinks politically to intervene. Just lay back, the American people, in all their infant wisdow, at least HATE intervening in Syria. Thus he is politically secure if he doesn’t do anything.

The UN will survive, as most nations and/or civilizations adhere to world peace and supra-national global governance (at least some sort of platform/forum between nations). China WILL be number 1, but their nice little seat on the Security Council will be just like the US’: secure. One superpower, one vote. I bet France/England’s seats will become unsustainable, maybe swapped for a common EU seat.

Peace can be had without liberty. Not our shared Western opinion of peace, but peace as a word in the dictionary means no war. That can surely be had without freedom. Disgusting example: North Korea. Not that I condone that, please.

Anyway, little children (black, if that makes it different for anybody here I hope not) were HACKED TO DEATH by boys little over their own age. That is MUCH worse than 1400 gassed people. MILLIONS mind you, not 1400. The US could have send a single USMC division, and would be hailed as hero’s for decades to come by many in the world (except some African warlords), and didn’t. There wasn’t ANYTHING in it for the US. Understandable, but no claim to moral high ground.

Syria isn’t a genocide. It’s an armed conflict, in where both sides are almost equally armed: hence the huge gains the rebels made. Tanks vs modern ATGM’s in urban confines. Yes, we all know those odds even DISfavor the government.

Interesting? Or very pathetic and disgusting? Why should your ‘football’ players tire and injurce themselves without any gain? Or is it to ‘send Iran a message’. You should grab your big boy shorts and tell France to ‘do it themselves OR SHUT UP’.

That is precicely why the US is sadly a plutocracy. If the voice of the people NEVER makes a political difference (only on social issues such as let’s kill gays etc), that means your democracy is a farce. If 70% or more want to cut defense spending, and that doesn’t happen, it even increases, there isn’t more evidence to be had to that effect. When is the last time you guys could even choose between anything other than TWO evils. Not even 3 of 4. Just 2? I think civil unrest is approriate in the US. Have your government work for YOU, not for the FEW.

France may have an ulterior motive. They may be the ones who sold chemical weapons to Saddam and Assad. Somewheres in the back of this old mine, it keeps popping up.

CONCERNED EUROPEAN.… Well typically European you missed the point of the post.…. But exactly correct.…. France and the rest of Europe better wise up.…. Your countries are already infected. BTW I am not French.….. In fact I can’t stand the SOBs.….

Your own premise stand of the desire to remove their chemical weapons from their hands themselves. Sure they would like to, they have to think about this situation BEFORE it ever happen and quite frankly if bombing chemical deposit would make them burn in a nice healthy smoke it would have been probably already done.

My understanding of the situation is that they want to send the message that chemical weapons should stand beside an atomic bomb: dissuasive weapons. Since they apparently used it to make “easy” gain against the rebels –and not all of them are on our side– then giving them an handicap (read: destroying some of their infrastructure) will make them think twice before using chemical weapons against their own people. Worst case scenario: Assad in the know may just double it, what is going to happen?

That doesn’t mean taking control of the chemical weapons. Eventually there would be a point where Syria is about to loose control of their weapons and then Russia might store them and it would be just fine (as al-queda could not reach it). Sure everybody will vow to their proper destruction, but that’s another debate; but it is more likely that they will stop to block motions against Assad and that is another day. That day the might be a UN mission for protecting those weapons.

See how the fate of those chemical weapons still depend of a long chain of ‘if’? The same apply for your reply.

> Republicans will have his head if he doesn’t ‘secure all chem weapons’.

Yes they will have his head if something bad ever happen in the future, both because of his actions and inactions but that doesn’t mean that he should sit and watch. What will mean then “do action X and you cross the red line” from any future president or himself? How do you think that Iran is going to interpret any consequent red line warning?

I think that it was a bad idea when Mr. Obama accepted the Nobel price of peace. Maybe he can return it back?

Why not? They started Libya and the good guys all piled-on that rabbit.

I know, but if the US even only bombs Syria for two days, the warmongers on the right will push Obama to expand. And he’ll look weak if he doesn’t. This reeks of false flag my friend. For two years assad has been losing ground, even had to ask Hezbollah and Iraqi Shiites for help. Why not gas the before? (ps: a few Al Qaida members GASSED, is that so horrible to you and I?)

I like the notion of chemical weapons being a no-go. But why would you want your country to be the one having to go in and clean the mess? I believe your nation is a big mess (with of course many very good things). I’d prefer you spend that money on yourselves. Let Syria sort it’s own mess. Aid them humanely, like you used to. Send in blankets and food. Give money to Jordan and Turkey so they can properly house the refugees. That would do great things PR wise also.

The prize looks more and more idiotic now. Hope he can close guantanamo, and house those inmates in red states haha. Anyway, red line comment was very silly, and indeed now his and the US’ credibility are on the line (warmongering credibility mind you). So yes, strike for a few days. But the question is, what next? WHAT NEXT? A few air strikes won’t weaken an autocratic regime like that. That’s why this is a case with no good ending. Help the rebels, and Al Qaida look alikes run the nation. Do nothing and there is deadlock.

I prefer deadlock if I see the possible scenarios. Like this, Hezbollah and Iran are sucked in and weakend (you here now have sunni’s and shiites killing each other). Nice win win for the West even if I sound like a complete heartless bastard. That’s why: send money and rations for those poor civilians.

I just saw this just today on jews news. This is a disturbing news.

500 Syrian Scud Missiles Have Been Aimed At Israel

Turkey ought to be damn wary of involvement in any military action against Syria. The SCUD and artillery rockets with which Syria has always been well-supplied could just as well fly north into Turkish territory as anywhere else.

Another bad news:

Russia sends warships to Mediterranean as Syria tension rises http://​www​.reuters​.com/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​/​2​0​1​3​/​0​8​/​2​9​/​u​s​-​s​yri

Syria’s Supersonic Yakhont and Iskandar Missiles Deterring US Naval Attack http://​english​.farsnews​.com/​n​e​w​s​t​e​x​t​.​a​s​p​x​?​n​n​=​1​392

Russia, West on collision course over Syria http://​news​.yahoo​.com/​r​u​s​s​i​a​-​w​e​s​t​-​s​p​l​i​t​-​o​v​e​r​-​s​yri

Iran: U.S. military action in Syria would spark ‘disaster’ http://​www​.cnn​.com/​2​0​1​3​/​0​8​/​2​8​/​w​o​r​l​d​/​m​e​a​s​t​/​s​y​r​i​a-i

They have Iron dome and a strong military. Not the West’s problem.

Concerned European I think your wrong about it Not being the West’s problem

Lets have the guts to once and for all clean the slate in the Middle East.…. After 62 years, I am tired of ALL their BS.….

I do not believe Russia will allow an invasion. She has interests there, a warm water port for instance. And if it appears that Assad starts to lose, Russia may intervene with their firepower. Their attack gunships for instance.

Now that is what Israel is waiting, Iran to act. Where ever Syria fires those scuds, there will be a retaliation. It could get real interesting. I worry about the boots on the ground that are in some of those nations.

The UN needs to go away. Most of the funding comes from the US. We need to pull out, stop all funding and tell them to go home. Same for NATO.

I got the point and took it further. I’m disgusted by british and french government actions. Not their people. At best I view them both as inferior/arrogant and loud haha

Tell the world’s nations to go home? Go home where? To MARS? We’re in this together yes? And ‘most’ funding comes from America because you have the biggest economy. It’s all in perspective. The UN does more good than bad, even if it’s ineffective many times. It never does BAD. How many UN sanctioned genocides or wars have there been? It’s always a positive contribution, even if not very effective many times. Nato is a different story. America would never give up on nato, even if it’s outlived it’s purpose (defending against the asiatic red hordes).

No, Russia won’t lift a finger. The most they can do is sneak in s300/s400. Russia won’t do anything NEAR resembling a direct confrontation with the US. Are you serious? NEVARR!

Israel’s problem isn’t the West’s problem. Those Scuds won’t reach our or your shores.

Enlist then old man. Proposing nuclear strikes is very unbecoming of a senior citizen. One would expect a bit more nuanced world view and prudance from somebody as experienced as yourself.

What is up with the censors„ One more time…Europe you created this mess with your colonies.… We have carried your sorry azzes long enough. Go take care of the problems.… Atlas has shrugged in the U.S. Not another dollar, not another drop of blood.… And if you hit us again we terminate your country… Clear enough?

I am fairly young and to be quite honest my first though was a nation-wide carpet bombing.

It seems ‘dark forces’ within the US are always looking for another was, not us. And yes, I support the US NOT getting involved. Helas I can’t do much to stop it. Can you? And when did we ‘hit’ you? Are you insane? And the colonies were a long time ago. Maybe you should stop propping up your little ‘protectorate’ Israel? They are a thorn in the eyes of a billion people in the middle east. Might have something to do with it.

Maybe you like to receive a nationwide carpet bombing. Carpet bombs kill people. It’s not ww2, when allied firebombings or Germany and Japan were acceptable. Now you can only bomb targets that are combatants, not civilians. Get in touch with your humane side. This is sad.

If someone is willing to jump of a bridge with you, so you don’t have to jump alone, does this change the issue, does this justify the jumping, just because someone is willing to go with you? We need to come home and clean and restore here first before trying to take over another country.

I said it was my first thought, not the best one.

Worth mentioning that I am not american.

>Syria’s Supersonic Yakhont and Iskandar Missiles Deterring US Naval Attack http://​english​.farsnews​.com/​n​e​w​s​t​e​x​t​.​a​s​p​x​?​n​n​=​1​392

I would not bother too much about this one. Did you looked at the domain name? Farsnews​.com = Iran.

AFAIK it’s inaccurate to say that nothing can stop it, or its opposite. There are many countermeasure that are designed to stop such treat. I am sure that they can reduce that risk to a very low number.

But there is nothing like the enemy trying to sink your boat to say that your defense work. Send the LCS. :)

The way that UN is working need to change. Because having China and Russia at the head of UN is not a viable model for us. I don’t believe a second that they are going to freeze their border where they are. Now they are contesting some territory.

What will come tomorrow? Deciding that both the north and south pole belong to them and start colonizing and harvesting its resources?

God be with France…I’m with her.

There are simply no good decision regarding Syria. Having the Hezbollah fighting against Al-qaeda fighting in Syria destroying Iran? You are way too optimistic.

Again my concern is about those chemical weapons. Not that I wish to make death and homeless by millions, but remove their stockpile of chemical and biological (I think they have something) and I will be more glad to stay as neutral as possible, which mean giving humain relief to everyone willing to quit that country.

And I don’t care what their belief and how they want to live their lifes, I don’t wish any sunni or chiites to be anihilated, I recognize their right to exist. Just don’t go at war against the rest of the world in the name of whatever reason comes to your mind. Especially given that they generally represent a small part of the population.


> (ps: a few Al Qaida members GASSED, is that so horrible to you and I?)

You said it: a few. Assad did not gassed Jabhat al-Nusra HQ but his own population … probably more children than rebels.

Sure I wouldn’t cry for some al-qaeda death, but I won’t approve the use of chemical weapon either. Firing a scud missile into its own territory was looking desperate, but I don’t think it’s against any conventions.

(off-topics) I was taking of to the china-japan island dispute as example.

I think that one of their best realistic hope would be a sudden rise of non al-qaeda rebels and offer them as much help as possible.

>A few air strikes won’t weaken an autocratic regime like that
It may create some logistic problems that may or may not have long lasting effects. Headache guarantee.

Can you imagine a situation like that one happen again and again? http://​www​.aljazeera​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​m​i​d​d​l​e​e​a​s​t​/​2​0​1​3​/​08/

It’s an uprising. He has a right to try to quell it. Anyway I believe this gas attack looks more and more suspect. The US had many false flag moments in it’s history, maybe this was some more pretext. It could have been a regular attack. Where are all the burned corpes (like in Iraq/Halabja). I’m not the one to defend Assad, I’m the one who’s tired of everytime somebody farts the US has to come in guns swining. Build some rail lines and highways instead of this. Attack only when absolutely necessary.

Removing those chemical weapons is impossible. It would mean US troops go in (while fighting Assad and perhaps many Al Qaiada-like rebels) while trying to establish logistics operation. Pipe deam. About 500 US casualties. It’s like a naked firefighter going into a building and playing Twister. Nah, not gonna happen.

Moments like these you and I recognize the importance of DIPLOMACY in the RIGHT TIME. Why hasn’t the US EVER persuaded Assad and his ilk in other nations to abandon chemical weapons? It did in Libya with their nuclear program. Give them some money, some trade possibilities, and they’ll destroy their stockpiles like crazy. Never happened, now we have to sit on the thorns.

That means months of air campaigns (pretty much aiding and abetting the rebels, many of whom would like to punch some more air holes into American bodies). So no, Obama won’t do that. You have to think of it as limited one or two day strikes, a punishment expedition if you will. No Libya 2.0.

I can see the headlines now, Al Qaida linked rebels take power/form government, assisted by US airstrikes. Man, that would want me to nuke the US:D After a decade of ‘fighting Al qaida’ you just give them a nation.

UN working for YOU? The US doesn’t even work for YOU. How do you want the UN, a body of SOVEREIGN nations to work for YOU? It isn’t your daddy’s small business. You use diplomacy and negotiate. Sometimes you get what you want sometimes you don’t. Like a criminal who says: these anti-stealing laws dont work for me! Insane. Russia and China are in the Security Council because they are global powers and have a right to have a voice in matters, just like you. Escpecially China. And no, the UN doesn’t allow unilateral annexation. Russia can hardly keep it’s borders already, no room for expansion. If anything China will annex some land in Russian Siberia.

Well we all have thoughts. Glad you’re not advocating it then:p

I think Bob and tee are pretty much right on the money in their statements, other than the fact that Erdogan and the AKP are much more organized, pragmatic and efficient than the Brotherhood, and those “positive” factors aren’t a good thing for the freedom of the average Turk in the long run.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Since they are the #1 superpower for more than 50 years, reason for not being happy accumulate and the goodness tend to be forgotten.

Do you realize how fundamentally different China or Russia is compared to the other western country? Right of veto should be limited to westerner. I wouldn’t care if those seats were filled by the (modern) Germany or else. But from communist country? It won’t be good.

>And no, the UN doesn’t allow unilateral annexation.
You can bet that they wont give a s**t about it. What we gonna do? Who is going to stop them? Who is going to be willing to go to war the the (by then) the new #1 superpower?
Sure for now to put birth control, but for how long?

Typo at the last sentece: Sure for now they got birth control, but for how long?

These are all meaningless suspicions. There are no burned corpse because the syrian army did not get control over the area to burn them like they did in Iraq. And no, the victims shown are not bleeding like those in iraq simply because it wasn’t the same gas used. A quick google search mention that many different gas are supposed to have been used, not just sarin. Nerve gas pass right through your skin and your lung, get inside your metabolism and kill you, without a single drop of blood. Victims bleeding were probably those exposed to blister gas like mustard, just make an image google search.

The gas attack is more than suspect, it’s a nonsense. Yet it happened. Would you blame the united states for nonsense coming from a country governed by a falling dictator that is about to loose everything? They got intel, what else do you need?

The hit us again remark was directed to the countries of the middle east not Europe. And no, I am not insane, I leave that diagnosis to Europe.…. The colonies were a long time ago, quite right, and we are still paying for that interference today.….Israel is not my “protectorate”, but by your remark, I have a better picture of what type of a “European” you really are…

I served 33 years (mostly in the Middle East) and four wars.…… I now firmly believe in the “GORT DOCTRINE” .….… But I can understand a European’s view, especially after two world wars and the cold war. Your ability to really screw things up is truly immeasurable.

I only really have one thing to say to your comment “but why would you want your country to be the one having to go in and clean the mess”.. Well if we didn’t who else will? Half the world of to cowardice to do anything about it besides the french ironically.

Right on! What a waste these scammsters are. Close the place and sell the property.

Yea, right. Just like when Clin-ton threw a bunch of TLAMS at that Osama meeting a few years before 9/11. That did alot of good.

You either go all in or don’t go at all!

Interesting, the UK and French decisions,since it was France, The UK (British Petroleum), and the Dutch (Shell Oil) that started the whole problem in modern history after WWI dividing up the middle east for oil exploration after the arab people were coerced into siding with the allies against the Germans, and then double crossed. Book “The Seven Sisters” teLls the whole story and includes the Standard Oil Company’s (of Teapot Dome scandal and friends of Woody Wilson) periferal involvement. And then of course the French continuning their bloody empirialism well into the 60’s in North Africa and both the middle and far east since Napolean. It is no wonder that the “Muslim Brotherhood” quickly and very agreeably fielded 4 full divisions+ of troops to help the Nazis invasions of eastern europe and the Soviet Union in WWII. After all, theocracies of Facism and Islam are very close akin.

I do not believe we should be involved with the Syrain situationh unless the United Nations requires involvement through the security council of the major nations including the Russians and China. With the present regime requirinf the Corps to reduce to 150,000, the army to 500,000, and the Navy and Air Force down considerably, we will have to have troops on the ground somewhere in the region even if the powers that be decide to use billions od dollars of missles to make a sophomoric, and the persons that will have to go in are the less than 1% of our population that deem it their duty to try to protect our nation under arms. And then of course the UN Disarment Treaty that Barry and Hillary have already signed, or plan to sign, also disarms our troops, as well as private citizens, while at home and only are given arms only when overseas.

Sen. Rand Paul:

Paul recalled that Kerry said during the Vietnam War, “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?”

“I would ask, ‘How do you ask a man to be the first to die for a mistake?’” Paul said. “I’m not sending my son, your son or anybody else’s son to fight for a stalemate.”

Paul said he was “proud” of Obama for following the Constitution and asking for congressional support. But he said the president made a “grave mistake” in setting a “red line.” Obama’s push for military action, he said, is an effort to “save face and add bad policy to bad policy.”

Reps. Gibson and Nunes:

Rep. Chris Gibson, R-N.Y., an Army veteran with multiple foreign deployments, said Saturday, “I hope my colleagues will fully think through the weightiness of this decision and reject military action. The situation on the ground in Syria is tragic and deeply saddening, but escalating the conflict and Americanizing the Syrian civil war will not resolve the matter.”

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said, “The apparent chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime is an appalling, unconscionable act by a bloodthirsty tyrant. The ‘limited’ military response supported by President Obama, however, shows no clear goal, strategy, or any coherence whatsoever, and is supported neither by myself nor the American people.”

Well said, gentlemen, well said.


True enough 50 years ago, however, we let the problem fester into the age of the internet, the atom, nano tech and who knows what other god awful techs to come. This should have been laid to rest a long time ago and wasn’t. Now we’ve let it creep into an age of technology when the rest of the world can’t ignore any region for terribly much longer. Syria launches some VX at a few major oil terminals in the Gulf and the flow of oil shuts off to the rest of the world from there and the whole world economy goes kerplop. That’s now, leaving this mess for another decade and then everyone has nukes and it only gets worse. For better or worse we are stuck with being involved like it or not.

France is not the best nation to go just with them with. IE we had joint intervention at different periods of time and it didn’t go well: Vietnam.

Not sure what you mean by “joint intervention at different periods of time”, but in VN we shipped tons of hardware, and presumably had OSS/CIA on the ground but didn’t overtly intervene in Vietnam.

Our problem was that Ho Chi Minh was a more persistent bastard than anyone on the southern side, who were predominantly Catholic in a Buddhist land. And on “their” side they had combat veterans trained by experienced insurgents (from the PLA) along with Soviet help for radars and SAMs. For the south, France followed the standard model of French leaders, Vietnamese soldiers, which left critical leadership gaps once the French withdrew.

Agreed. Bear in mind Reagan went into Lebanon, put ships offshore, used the Iowas to bombard targets on land and put Marines on the ground. Didn’t work, at least not for the blood price that Reagan wanted to pay in Lebanon and perceived payoff.

The UN is basically a souped up League of Nations, though it tends to turn into a League of Nations stalematefest because of the monopoly of power held by the Security Council and its permanent members. The US appointed itself, the UK, France, the USSR and China to the council for life, and post-WW2 it would’ve been 5 allies, and it turned to 4:1 USSR, then 3:2 Comintern after the change from Taiwan to the PRC on the permanent seat.

The only way to really be sure is to secure bodies for an autopsy. But Muslims can be squeamish about that kind of thing, which doesn’t help.

You are correct in that blister agents have different effects than nerve agents; and I suppose the other problem will be degradation of the sarin itself. One could look for secondary metabolites in survivors urine and blood serum, and assess impact sites for active sarin, side-products of UV exposure and the presence of the stabilizing agents. However, because sarin’s functional similarity to many pesticides it may use many of the same stabilizing agents as commercial pesticides, and may lead to a false positive situation unless you know what you are looking for.

Of course, Assad or the rebels could simply dispense malathion on people for similar effects…it wouldn’t be magical red line sarin, but it’s still Evil. Which also means that if you gas someone with malathion or some other ACh-inhibiting pesticide, it will produce similar injuries to sarin and would not be a lie or fabrication.

And as we all know, just because you detect a chemical weapon doesn’t mean you know who fired it.

Funny. My first thought was giving AK-47s to the women and telling them to fight for a better future for their daughters.

We didn’t overtly intervene? What do you call over 500,000 troops? And 58,000 casualties?

I meant that Indochina wasn’t a “joint operation” in the modern sense before 1954 (which is the period alluded to by the poster). We supplied weapons, but until the French left most the fighting was done by the French and Vietnamese alone; there was minimal American presence to do “joint intervention” with. And once the French left, we stepped in, and presumably didn’t listen to anything the French had to tell us.

We’ve already given them a nation before. In the ‘90s we abandoned Afghanistan to its fate. If we fail to intervene in Syria they are more than likely to beat the Alawites anyways, and end up controlling a large chunk of Syria that they can turn into Salafistan and pen the Alawite government against the ocean and Lebanon. On the minus side, Assad and “Syria” would survive in rump form, but on the minus side Salafistan would be landlocked and spread the stupid to neighbors Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Jordan.

I guess the better question is why Assad thought chemical weapons would secure his regime? Pretending you have WMD brought Iraq down. Not having WMD prolonged Gaddafi’s reign but didn’t do him any favors in the end (though if Libya had WMD they would have been crushed much sooner). Syria is “lucky” in that they are number three and the world is more wary and weary of this kind of thing…

That said, we signed the CWC, as did the USSR and mutually publically disarmed our chemical weapons infrastructure (the Soviets, maybe not so much). If Syria refuses to eliminate chemical weapons, what are we supposed to do, give them fighter jets, white phosphorus and Daisy Cutters so he can be equally vicious to whoever he wishes to target, but do so with compliant weaponry?

This is like doing a gun exchange program and replacing semi-automatics with revolvers. People keep chemical weapons because they are unique in their effects. They will not trade in swords for plowshares if they went through the trouble to get very, very specialized swords. They will only trade specialized swords for specialized swords. If they really wanted plowshares, there are better ways to beg/ask for them; look at Gaddafi’s Bush-era playbook.

Civil unrest will never happen in America. The media has ensured that. We gotta tune in to watch the next episode of Jersey Shore, and American Idol! No one has time to protest! Besides, when polled, a great deal of Americans don’t seem to mind the few being in power, they call it being “successful”. And both political parties continue to keep America divided (divide and conquer) with the petty bickering.

Part 1 of 4:
What, pray tell, could Obama possibly have on his mind? What possible good could come from an American (with our French semi-sidekicks) “victory” in Syria? And, just what would constitute that “victory”? How would we define it? Well? How?
Why hasn’t the president defined it? Hey, we could just nuke ‘em and be done with it. We could gas ‘em until they drop in their tracks. If the objective is to teach ‘em a lesson, well, let’s do it in the least costly, to us, manner — let’s just gas ‘em! Besides, that would give ‘em a taste of their own medicine, right?

Part 2 of 4:
Well … but how do we ensure that only the “guilty” parties are gassed, or rocketed, or machine-gunned, or whatever the presidential wannabe warrior features as his pseudo-and-never-to-have-been-found-volunteering-for-service-himself macho flavor of the month? Hmm? Pity there wasn’t a draft during Obama’s vulnerable days as he’d no doubt whatsoever have opted-out “on principle,” been properly labeled as the draft-dodger his personality has shown him to be, in spirit, and we, veterans and active-duty personnel, would never have had to be made subject to his inanities. And, of course, we all could have save a few bucks sent in innocent support for his election. Twice.

Part 3 of 4:
So, if we don’t know how we would define our having accomplished whatever it is that our intervention is designed to do, and we haven’t decided on the “correct” weapons system to do, and we don’t know how to define when we’ve done enough of it, and we don’t know what effects our doing whatever we do do will have on, even on the earlier victims themselves, well, what the hey are we doing threatening to do anything at all? Are we, really, so bent on appearing so callous, so ignorant, and, well, so 3rd Worldish ourselves, as a society?

Part 4 of 4:
And, we can can’t even get the mechanics of the process right. Our president-in-training Obama has not even asked for a declaration of war! No, he’s asking that Congress vote not to attempt to prevent him from doing what he tells them he’sagonnado anyway, what anyone with an ounce of common sense would see to be a stupid undertaking. Consider, we actually could end up teaming-up with the Syrian monarch’s henchmen themselves, to attempt to prevent alQ monsters from seizing the chemicals in the chaos that a US (and in all/all/all likelihood Israeli) military bungling will create there.
Nope, dem summabritches in Congress are going to be let off the hook by not even having to use the words: “Declaration of War.”

Nope they don’t even have the intestinal fortitude, or, manliness, to insist, themselves, on using that unambiguous, honest, straightforward and Constitutionally-required language that they concur in a Declaration of War enabling the current White House fruitcake to show how “tough” he can be with Mickey-Mouse 3rd World dictators.


It is, indeed, a sad, sad day for our America.

Precisely Chris, precisely! Wish I could have said in so few and well-chosen words.

Well-put, all. Thanks! But, one point of clarification, the Consitution does not speak of “congressional support” for the President waging war. The Constitution states that Congress must Declare war. It is a positive instruction to President, not an acquiesence to whatever incumbent might want. And Obama intentionally has not asked for a Declaration of War. If he had, the integrity required to answer that questions straightforwardly “yea” OR “nay” would have been too much for a majority of Congress to have provided. They would have found some clown-arsed way to do nothing whatsoever, sat out whatever was done, by whomever, and then sided post-facto with whatever they perceived to be the “winning” side, politically.

having france supporting you is like having no support

Sen. McCain, one of the biggest advocates of American intervention in the Syrian Civil War, apparently takes the situation so seriously that he chooses to play cell-phone poker during the Senate hearing on the matter:

Sarin & its analogue GB are organophosphate based “nerve agents” If they are deployed as a single “agent” & of low “purity” their will be highly chemically reactive substances, therefore more diff. 2 detect. If deployed in binary form like a 155 mm arty shell, their resulatant will be much purer & persistant (Days-weeks) & therefore a more easily detectable substance, the good old M-8/M-9 paper/ tape then a M-256A1 kit will give ya a good idea if “active agents” are present. Residual agents gc/ms gets u there. Malathion as a chemical weapon? wow u need a whole lotta of it!!! Malathion is an insecticide of relatively low human toxicity,In the US, it was/is the most commonly used organophosphate insecticide. Your spot on chemically (same “base” compound) but the concentrations needed to produce those of Sarin or GB.….. thats a whole lot of the stuff, as a “masking” agent, again GC/MS takes care of that.…. still haven’t seen or heard of what the UN detected. Another troubling aspect all of the MSM video & utubbies I’ve seen ALL lack one symptom that ALWAYS presents in human exposue to a inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase loss of bladder/bowels.….today one “picture” of rows of dead babies were debunked, thay were actually Kurds from SH days. The 1st casuality in war is truth!

It’s not just the primary compound itself, it’s the metabolite that’s the problem. For instance, methanol in the body is one thing, methanol’s final metabolite after alcohol dehydration is…formaldehyde. Apparently malathion’s final metabolite is much more toxic (and to me, you need the blood and GC/MS, or LC/MS even).

But yeah, if the UN guys don’t have bodies and tissue from the hospitals or doctors that worked with the patients all bets are off. If a story is propagated about how the doctors died from treating the patients, then we’ll know they’re making something up, or the Syrians upped the ante to biological weapons (omg, a black line instead of a red line!)

All of this because of a “off the teleprompter” answer to a question, answered in classic POTUS Obama’s Professorial role, staring off into the distance, & speakin’ from the hip about “that would be a red line for my administration”.…today HOR MIN. LDR Pelosi said: “The POTUS “didn’t draw any red lines anywhere” she then comenced 2 babbling about asking her toddler grand-daughter what should “we” do! I gotta admit, she looks great @ 75!, But when she gets that glitter in her eyes & starts babbling, Its really scary!!!!

Good catch!!!!! almost as good as House. Min. Ldr Pelosi’s comments about “red lines”!

I not dis’grin w/ya comment about mala. “metabolites” I ‘member some wacko who swallowed a tablespoon of the stuff when it was used for mosq. sprayin’. But low grade sarin or GB will have a high pH & chemically degrade in the environment to phosphate derivatives…which by themselves are easily id’d w/field methods. what I worry about are the arty delivered ones, its only 3 chemicals (will not say) seperated by a waxlike membrane,(the USSR method) mixed by the firing force or a binary round with the final additive“DICKED” into the shell,(US way) this produces high quality sarin or GB.…easily detected “outside” of the body by again “field methods”. Other troubling things missing from whats being visually reported are the absence of 1st line Tx’s: atropine tourettes & 2 PAM Chloride injector “pens” by med. personnel & the med personnel treating victims “convulsing” w/o presenting w/loss of blad/bowel, out of sequence exposure symptomology! The MOST troubling; med. pers. w/o any personal protective equip. i.e. MOPP type gear. Tx’in “casualities”. I don’t doubt that some form of “chemical warfare” occurred. But certainly not on a SCUD missle scale, & if by arty round or monkey’ed up “rockets” its low qual. stuff.…. it doesn’t pass the smell test… 2 many players, 2 much at stake, & 2 many “Murphys” waitin’ 2 spring up.……greeted by a BIG duh!

Well gollyeee, judgin’ by the neg’s I learn’t sumptin, the MB is a political force in Turkey, I’m well aware of the AK parties crackdown on a free press, But the countries foreign policies have been more Eurocentric than m.e. oriented. Granted since the late 90’s they have reaped HUGE rewards from energy partnerships with central asian & russian interests as well as being a player in Iraqi enrgy development. They are however, a staunch U.S. Ally, one of the “five fingers” of NATO’s nuc. arsenal & have NATO’s largest Army I also recognize their 90%+ sunni but “Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way” the motto of the MB (Turkey)??? you got me!

This will be another Viet Nam, there is only one thing these shi head countries understand, [ BOOM, !!!!!] just ask Japan; and I think the brits forgot just who the hell help them in ww11, and the dam Russians, YES Hitler was a mad man, but if we had let that clown take Europe, and Russia, we wouldn’t have all this shi… going onto day. …However if it starts, then we should finish war once and for all, and let these bone head countries know who is the boss, we have not won a war since WW11. .…. If congress was smart, instead of smart ass, they would raise the import tax, so high, these countries cant much in, and lower the export tax, the more you ship, the more [WE] [ half to make.]

Sent. McCain, has forgotten where he was for 8 yrs, ion the 60’s., and so has Sen. Kerry.

It’s a turd rich scenario. No matter where we step were going to be standing in it. I say NO GO. Let Syria’s neighbors deal with this mess.

Sen (CAPT) McCain & (LT.?) SECSTATE Kerry are in 2 very different catagories. I think It would be fair to say Sen. McCain spent more time hangin’ from the ceilin’ in his “Room” @ the “Hilton” than SECSTATE Kerry spent “in-country” (4 sumtin’ months?).…. & then there’s that whole “throwin’ his medals thing” A Silver Star!!!!!! wtf????& than trashin’ his comrades in arms b 4 congress!!!!!! I can’t stand to even look at that guy!!

Pity government has no objective analytical chemist on call to do this kind of thing. In the ‘80s we used Meselson to do the anthrax studies post-Sverdlovsk…not sure who the chemical weapons guy today would be.

Said George Washington, ever.
They did meh War of Austrian Succession
They did achieve objectives War of Spanish Succession
Did okay in Europe for the Seven Years War, but lost badly overseas
Though they aided the Indians in stymieing Great Britain in America
Though they lost New France to England,
Though they did lose India to the British,
Fought Germany to stalemate
But lost the second time around
And got bled white in Indochina
But lost the home front regarding Algeria (but exterminated the resistance, for the most part)
And got tsk-tsk’ed by the US over Suez, but kicked Egypt’s ass

The only way a limited bombing campaign in Syria can be legal under International Law is if it is approved by the U.N. It is flat-out ILLEGAL for any State or pseudo-Empire to bomb another State without a declaration of War. Are we so jingoistic, distracted enough from sober evaluation, and so full of righteous indignation that we are ready to declare war on Syria? Are we really that stupid?

The only beneficiaries of a “limited military campaign” in Syria are corporate contractors and the State of Israel both of which are interested only in assets they can acquire from such actions. Neither gives a (xxxxx) about anything else.

When you suggest that gassing Al Qaida members would somehow be an acceptable use of chemical weapons, I question your rationality. I agree that the U.S. should not be held as the “world poilce”. It has gotten us nothing but negative publicity on all sides. But in a situation where the UN is being held hostage by Russia and China, and the Arab League is being curbed by Iraq and Egypt (2 countries in their own quagmires), what are the U.S. options?

1. Do nothing and the use of chemical weapons in Syria is effectiovely approved. This opens the door to more of the same around the world.
2. Call in an air strike after weeks of delay and the Syrian regime has had time to mitigate the effectivenes of the strike by moving key miltary equipment & troops into residential areas, move deatinees into target areas, etc.
3. Heavily arm the insurgancy and now we are one step away from taking responsibility for the outcome.
4. Set up a “no fly zone” like we did in Lybia, selectively striking at Syrian assets as they are either moved or used, until the tables are turned. Withdraw once Syria’s air power has been destroyed and provide humanitarian aid to the Syrian people until the regime is toppled from within.

I vote for Option 4.

The Syrian people are much more moderate than the Western Press has given them credit for. Maybe they don’t love America after years of propoganda from the Assad regime, but well timed assistance could turn some minds. To sit by and do nothing is a terrible option that would result in an escalation of brutality from the Assad regime and their thug allies.

Now mebbe you can visualize why NATO is so reluctant to add them as a member; despite the fact that they have engaged in every Western war since what? The Crimean War?

“FRANCE STANDS ALONE…” What’s that tell you?

jcitizen: neswsflash: Turkey “joined” NATO in 52–53 I think, they fougt w/US forces in Korea.…, supplied SVN w/their merchant ships, helped the U.S. Strategy in DS/DS, helped occurpy n.Iraq during OIF-1/2, & supplied troops to ISAF to secure Kabul, & workers for the PRT’s in the “Stan”.….& are currently participating w/other NATO members in the Black Sea visiting ports in the Ukrane, they have the largest Army, & area strategically located as a country & are 1 of 5 NATO nations hosting Nuclear Weapons.…. u have their membership in the EU confused w/NATO, just a friendly fyi.….…

USA arent the best nation to go with either if that can make you feel better :)

“going to bomb someone with the US” doesn’t sound like a nice move in most parts of the world in case you didn’t know…

..and in Vietnam, some smart asses trained HoChiMinh and helped him to fight against colonial french before realizing that he was a communist.

Going is bad, not going is bad… not an easy choice

Typical French move, they’ll wade in just deep enough to make it look like they’re brave and just heros, most likely in an effort to get some panties to drop…

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | , and join us on Google+
© 2015 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.