Red Line Crossed: Hagel, Kerry Say Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons.....

OOOPS THERE IT IS!

The Obama administration drew a "red line" in the sand months ago with the Assad regime in Damascus: If they were to use WMD's during their nation's civil war, the United States would intervene militarily. The president himself said the deployment of such weapons would represent a "game-changer." The British, French, and Israelis have all concluded that chemical weapons have been deployed, and now top US officials are co-signing that assessment. The Secretary of State:



Josh Lederman @joshledermanAP
WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry says Syrian regime launched 2 chemical attacks.

And the Secretary of Defense:

U.S. intelligence has concluded "with some degree of varying confidence," that the Syrian government has used sarin gas as a weapon in its 2-year-old civil war, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday. Hagel, speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi, said the White House has informed two senators by letter that, within the past day, "our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin." "It violates every convention of warfare," Hagel said

Once any President of the United States has established a clear line that cannot be crossed, he must follow-through on his threats if they're not heeded. American credibility is at stake; it's already been bruised in Syria. How long has it been since our Secretary of State pronounced that Assad "must go"? Answer: More than one full year. But if we do intervene, who's to say that we'd be helping the right side?.....snip~

Red Line Crossed: Hagel, Kerry Say Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons - Guy Benson

It would appear Syria has crossed Obama's line in the Sand. Does he now engage us into Syria? What will be the consequences if he jumps and commits us? Thoughts?

I wonder what kind of message not committing us would send. Definitely a tough situation.

MMC said:

OOOPS THERE IT IS!

The Obama administration drew a "red line" in the sand months ago with the Assad regime in Damascus: If they were to use WMD's during their nation's civil war, the United States would intervene militarily. The president himself said the deployment of such weapons would represent a "game-changer." The British, French, and Israelis have all concluded that chemical weapons have been deployed, and now top US officials are co-signing that assessment. The Secretary of State:

Josh Lederman @joshledermanAP
WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry says Syrian regime launched 2 chemical attacks.

And the Secretary of Defense:

U.S. intelligence has concluded "with some degree of varying confidence," that the Syrian government has used sarin gas as a weapon in its 2-year-old civil war, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday. Hagel, speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi, said the White House has informed two senators by letter that, within the past day, "our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin." "It violates every convention of warfare," Hagel said

Once any President of the United States has established a clear line that cannot be crossed, he must follow-through on his threats if they're not heeded. American credibility is at stake; it's already been bruised in Syria. How long has it been since our Secretary of State pronounced that Assad "must go"? Answer: More than one full year. But if we do intervene, who's to say that we'd be helping the right side?.....snip~

Red Line Crossed: Hagel, Kerry Say Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons - Guy Benson

It would appear Syria has crossed Obama's line in the Sand. Does he now engage us into Syria? What will be the consequences if he jumps and commits us? Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I hate it. Damned if you damned if you dont.

The only thing I do know is we can't keep sending

our troops & treasure around the world to do other

countries fighting!

I would never have the balls to do it but the

middle east should become a parking lot!

We gotta get Medusa out before we make it

the parking lot.:twocents:

I imagine we will send some aircraft and blow some stuff up. Hopefully no boots on the ground.

penn1954 said:

I hate it. Damned if you damned if you dont.

The only thing I do know is we can't keep sending

our troops & treasure around the world to do other

countries fighting!

I would never have the balls to do it but the

middle east should become a parking lot!

We gotta get Medusa out before we make it

the parking lot.:twocents:

Click to expand...

Republic Now! said:

I wonder what kind of message not committing us would send. Definitely a tough situation.

Click to expand...

29 oppositons groups have already signed pledges to defy us and back Al Nusra ......they state they will implement sharia law. Yet Christians will not have anything to fear. Civillian committees have signed on to back Al Nusra and the FSA has told all in their ranks to support all Al Nusra operations.

We just gave these Sunni rebels 188 million with the last 2 months. The Suad and Qatarians are providing weapons for them thru Turkey.

Why should we get involve.....let the Sunni Arabs pay for their war and let them be the one to go and shed their blood. Let them be the one to keep on subjugating and systematically kill the Shi'te and the Zaydi. Let them go down in history for doing such.

MMC said:

29 oppositons groups have already signed pledges to defy us and back Al Nusra ......they state they will implement sharia law. Yet Christians will not have anything to fear. Civillian committees have signed on to back Al Nusra and the FSA has told all in their ranks to support all Al Nusra operations.

We just gave these Sunni rebels 188 million with the last 2 months. The Suad and Qatarians are providing weapons for them thru Turkey.

Why should we get involve.....let the Sunni Arabs pay for their war and let them be the one to go and shed their blood. Let them be the one to keep on subjugating and systematically kill the Shi'te and the Zaydi. Let them go down in history for doing such.

Click to expand...

The motivation behind getting involved would be to influence the future of Syria, to hopefully ensure a friendly or at least not hostile government, preferably also not in bed with Iran, establishes itself there. Additionally we'd also like to make sure those chemical and biological weapons don't fall into the hands of people we'd really rather not have them. Now I'm not saying we should get involved for these reasons, but if we were to get involved this would be why.

Also Obama never said exactly what crossing the 'red line' would mean, he said it would change his way of thinking and approaching the problem but he didn't commit to any course of action, that's smart.

Wiseone said:

The motivation behind getting involved would be to influence the future of Syria, to hopefully ensure a friendly or at least not hostile government, preferably also not in bed with Iran, establishes itself there. Additionally we'd also like to make sure those chemical and biological weapons don't fall into the hands of people we'd really rather not have them. Now I'm not saying we should get involved for these reasons, but if we were to get involved this would be why.

Also Obama never said exactly what crossing the 'red line' would mean, he said it would change his way of thinking and approaching the problem but he didn't commit to any course of action, that's smart.

Click to expand...

Obama stated it would be a Game Changer.....none mistook what he meant by that tho. So what else could he have meant. We already have Sanctions on them and are funding them plus supplying them weapons on the sly. Plus we have no negotiations from them.

Kerry wants commitment by others.....but whats makes this different than any thing else that comes with our policy. Everyone else before Kerry has said the same thing. So who will commit?

I guarantee you one thing.....It wont be the Saud and the Qatarians. They tend to not like putting themselves on the line for most anything.

MMC said:

Obama stated it would be a Game Changer.....none mistook what he meant by that tho. So what else could he have meant. We already have Sanctions on them and are funding them plus supplying them weapons on the sly. Plus we have no negotiations from them.

Kerry wants commitment by others.....but whats makes this different than any thing else that comes with our policy. Everyone else before Kerry has said the same thing. So who will commit?

I guarantee you one thing.....It wont be the Saud and the Qatarians. They tend to not like putting themselves on the line for most anything.

Click to expand...

We aren't supplying weapons to the rebels, and "game changer" could mean lots of things, we'll have to see what it means.

Wiseone said:

We aren't supplying weapons to the rebels, and "game changer" could mean lots of things, we'll have to see what it means.

Click to expand...

Did you mean.....that it can't be proved that we are supplying weapons to the Syrians. We already know about the Libyan freighter that showed up off the Cost of Syria. The Week Prior to the Libyan Consulate attack. Moreover we know Stevens was meeting with the Turkish Envoy in Libya when most others had pulled all their Ambassadors out of Libya. Moreover Right before the Attack.

MMC said:

Did you mean.....that it can't be proved that we are supplying weapons to the Syrians. We already know about the Libyan freighter that showed up off the Cost of Syria. The Week Prior to the Libyan Consulate attack. Moreover we know Stevens was meeting with the Turkish Envoy in Libya when most others had pulled all their Ambassadors out of Libya. Moreover Right before the Attack.

Click to expand...

Right it can't be proved and until it can there's no reason anyone should believe we are, don't tell me you're going to believe something you yourself said isn't proven? And I don't know if you know but Libya is awash with weapons, some of them appearing somewhere is not all that surprising.

MMC said:

OOOPS THERE IT IS!

The Obama administration drew a "red line" in the sand months ago with the Assad regime in Damascus: If they were to use WMD's during their nation's civil war, the United States would intervene militarily. The president himself said the deployment of such weapons would represent a "game-changer." The British, French, and Israelis have all concluded that chemical weapons have been deployed, and now top US officials are co-signing that assessment. The Secretary of State:

Josh Lederman @joshledermanAP
WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry says Syrian regime launched 2 chemical attacks.

And the Secretary of Defense:

U.S. intelligence has concluded "with some degree of varying confidence," that the Syrian government has used sarin gas as a weapon in its 2-year-old civil war, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday. Hagel, speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi, said the White House has informed two senators by letter that, within the past day, "our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin." "It violates every convention of warfare," Hagel said

Once any President of the United States has established a clear line that cannot be crossed, he must follow-through on his threats if they're not heeded. American credibility is at stake; it's already been bruised in Syria. How long has it been since our Secretary of State pronounced that Assad "must go"? Answer: More than one full year. But if we do intervene, who's to say that we'd be helping the right side?.....snip~

Red Line Crossed: Hagel, Kerry Say Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons - Guy Benson

It would appear Syria has crossed Obama's line in the Sand. Does he now engage us into Syria? What will be the consequences if he jumps and commits us? Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Your last question of: “Who’d to say if we would be helping the right side?” That question needs to be answered before we get involved deeply. To the untrained eye, there seems no question; any side that gets rid of Aasad has to be the right side especially when you take Aasad and Irani close ties.

But is it? Those who have followed this situation closely know that AQ and other Islamic extremist groups have infiltrated the opposition and have sent in fighters to over throw Aasad more secular government hoping to establish an Islamic Republic. If this is done a Syrian Islamic Republic would be far worse and a more dedicated enemy of the U.S. than Aasad every thought of being.

The fact might be that there is no right side in this affair regardless of which side uses what.

Wiseone said:

Also Obama never said exactly what crossing the 'red line' would mean, he said it would change his way of thinking and approaching the problem but he didn't commit to any course of action, that's smart.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you are right, but the perception that all heck would break loose, the revenge of the U.S. would fall heavily upon Aasad if he used WMD's is there. That is how the Arab world has taken Obama statement anyway. They expect another Desert Storm.

This is a very delicate situation and one that should not lead to rash decisions.

Hopefully, and I expect obviously, the Obama administration as well as NATO allies in the region such as Turkey and friendly Arab nations in the area have worked on contingency plans for just such a development and they have sufficient intelligence that will enable them to do something constructive without unleashing further chemical weapons by mistake or intentionally.

There is a special place in hell for people like Assad and I hope and pray that the Syrian people who deserve so much better will one day soon rid themselves of this man and his agents.

Wiseone said:

Right it can't be proved and until it can there's no reason anyone should believe we are, don't tell me you're going to believe something you yourself said isn't proven? And I don't know if you know but Libya is awash with weapons, some of them appearing somewhere is not all that surprising.

Click to expand...

Yeah I know.....I also know Clinton stated we were giving soft Aid. I also Know the CIA was Directing weapons Thru Turkey and their Job was allegedly not to allow them to fall into the Hands of AQ. So let me ask you this.....How did the Weapons fall off into the hands of AL Nusra? ManPads Specifically?

From Clintons testimony before the Senate and House Committees.

10.09am ET

Clinton: A 'Pandora's Box' of weapons in North Africa

Here's a good question from Democratic Benjamin Cardin: How does the US make sure that weapons it pours into conflicts like the Libyan revolution don't spread to places like Algeria and beyond?

"We had a concerted effort to try to track down and find and recover ManPads" and other weapons in Libya, Clinton says.

"The vast majority of weapons came out of Ghadafi warehouses," she says. Some weapons spread throughout the region, including to Syria.

"This Pandora's box of weapons coming out of these countries in MENA" is a threat, she says.....snip~

MMC said:

OOOPS THERE IT IS!

The Obama administration drew a "red line" in the sand months ago with the Assad regime in Damascus: If they were to use WMD's during their nation's civil war, the United States would intervene militarily. The president himself said the deployment of such weapons would represent a "game-changer." The British, French, and Israelis have all concluded that chemical weapons have been deployed, and now top US officials are co-signing that assessment. The Secretary of State:

Josh Lederman @joshledermanAP
WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry says Syrian regime launched 2 chemical attacks.

And the Secretary of Defense:

U.S. intelligence has concluded "with some degree of varying confidence," that the Syrian government has used sarin gas as a weapon in its 2-year-old civil war, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday. Hagel, speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi, said the White House has informed two senators by letter that, within the past day, "our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin." "It violates every convention of warfare," Hagel said

Once any President of the United States has established a clear line that cannot be crossed, he must follow-through on his threats if they're not heeded. American credibility is at stake; it's already been bruised in Syria. How long has it been since our Secretary of State pronounced that Assad "must go"? Answer: More than one full year. But if we do intervene, who's to say that we'd be helping the right side?.....snip~

Red Line Crossed: Hagel, Kerry Say Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons - Guy Benson

It would appear Syria has crossed Obama's line in the Sand. Does he now engage us into Syria? What will be the consequences if he jumps and commits us? Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I've heard this story before....

i think that any military action should be funded by across the board tax increases. perhaps that will make people less enthusiastic for new war.

Ikari said:

I've heard this story before....

Click to expand...

Yeah I know.....but there is a difference this time. It falls under Obama's Watch. According to what I heard he is being careful and using Iraq as his excuse.

While Obama has declared that the deployment of chemical weapons would be a game-changer and has threatened unspecified consequences if it happened, his administration is moving carefully - saying it is mindful of the lessons of the start of the Iraq war more than a decade ago.

SURPRISE ANNOUNCEMENT

But Obama appeared intent on deflecting pressure for swift action by stressing the need for a comprehensive U.N. investigation on the ground in Syria - something Assad has blocked from going forward.

"The intelligence community has been assessing information for some time on this issue and the decision to reach this conclusion was made within the past 24 hours," Hagel said.

The White House said it wanted to provide a "prompt response" to a query on Wednesday from lawmakers about whether Syria had used chemical weapons. The legislators' letter to Obama cited the assessments by Israel, France and Britain.

Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, one of the leading advocates of deeper U.S. involvement in the Syrian conflict, said the intelligence assessment demanded a response.

"As NATO has said in the past, any use of these weapons would be completely unacceptable and a clear breach of international law, and if any side uses these weapons we would expect a reaction from the international community," the official said......snip~

U.S. suspects Syria used chemical weapons, wants proof | Reuters

It appears that Hagel is telling Obama that intelligence has had this information about Chemical Weapons for sometime. As we can see Johnny Quest McCain wants to Jump Right on in. Course the UN says it expects the International Community to Deal with the Issue.

How about the UN telling the Sunni Arabs.....its your mess. Deal with it on your own for once in ya lives. Trying standing on your own 2 feet and try fighting your own friggen battles for a Change.

Now Watch how the International Community pushes us to get involved to come and save the day.