The idea of seeking Congressional approval for another war still appears to be a vague concept for our Constitutional lawyer / Peace Prize-winning President, but this is a step in the right direction. Obama suffers under the illusion that he ought to “let voices be heard” and simply inform Congress and America of his decisions rather than actually asking through the proper legal channels. In Obama’s world, elections mean mandates, legal approval is a matter of letting voices be heard, and “activists say” constitutes evidence. I almost prefer the more straightforward tyrannical approach of George W. Bush in which a war is a war and the war gets declared for clear, warlike reasons, whether or not it “resignates” with the people.
Another warmongering FAIL!
There has been no evidence whatsoever that the Assad regime has done anything wrong and I predict that there will be nothing forthcoming apart from fake photos, talk of WMDs and perhaps some more stories of babies thrown from incubators.
Let’s have a look at some of the PR/doublespeak/BS from this CBS article:
Cameron asserted that “from all the evidence we have,” his government, along with the Obama administration, had made the “judgment” that “the regime is responsible and should be held to account.”
British Joint Intelligence Organization (JTI) released a report claiming “a limited but growing body of intelligence”
“Some of this intelligence is highly sensitive”
there was “intelligence that regime forces took precautions consistent with chemical weapons use” in the immediate prelude to the Ghouta attacks. He did not explain where that information had come from.
The White House has claimed to have obtained intercepted phone calls that provide further evidence against the Assad regime, and administration officials also told CBS News that intelligence agencies detected activity at known Syrian chemical weapons sites the week before the Ghouta attack.
It hinges largely on the argument, as Cameron put it Thursday, that there are simply “no plausible alternate scenarios.”
There simply ARE “plausible alternative scenarios,” for example, the so-called rebels did it.
“There is no credible evidence that any opposition group has used CW (chemical weapons). A number continue to seek a CW capability, but none currently has the capability to conduct a CW attack on this scale.”
What scale? What was the scale of the attack and why couldn’t they have done it? Answer: no answer.
U.S. intelligence concluded “with some degree of varying confidence” that the Syrian government had twice used chemical weapons
Most Americans have concluded, with a high degree of confidence, that our government has lied to get us into wars before and is doing it again. I conclude with very high degrees of slightly varying confidence that the British ruling class is willing to fight to the last American.
“too late to be credible”
“At this juncture, any belated decision by the regime to grant access to the UN team would be considered too late to be credible, including because the evidence available has been significantly corrupted as a result of the regime’s persistent shelling and other intentional actions over the last five days,” the official said.
This lovely little theme has been used by Kerry among others to explain any lack of evidence. Very Rumsfeldian epistemology here.
So, what we have is: a limited but growing body of highly sensitive intelligence which is believed with some degree of varying confidence.
The BS is deep this time, and while Americans might get fooled once, or twice, or 50 times, this might be the “red line” we’ve been waiting for.
Behind John Kerry’s shallow doublespeak, what we find are mafia-style threats from shady friends like Bandar. Russia has been strong in opposing an illegal Western attack on Syria, as have 9% of America and 11% of the UK.