Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 112
Like Tree106Likes

Thread: President Obama Orders Release of Report Justifying Air Strike in Syria

  1. #1
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    34,678

    Default President Obama Orders Release of Report Justifying Air Strike in Syria

    Obama Orders Release of Report Justifying Air Strike in Syria










    Sometime in the next day or two, the Obama administration will release a declassified report justifying a U.S. military strike in Syria, according to CBS News. The news comes just hours after Secretary of State John Kerry held a press conference in which he described last week's chemical attacks in Syria as an "obscenity” that “defy any code of morality."


    The CBS News report describes a meeting of Obama's national security team that took place on Saturday. The meeting reportedly included “detailed analysis” of evidence about the chemical attacks that provides “a near air-tight circumstantial case that the Syrian regime was behind it.”


    From CBS News:


    There was no debate at the Saturday meeting that a military response is necessary. Obama ordered up legal justifications for a military strike, should he order one, outside of the United Nations Security Council. That process is well underway, and particular emphasis is being placed on alleged violations of the Geneva Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention.

    And if/when Obama launches an attack, the U.S. is already well-positioned; there are four Navy warships stationed in the eastern Mediterranean, on-call to launch cruise missiles within hours of receiving Obama's orders, and a British submarine is reportedly stationed nearby. Any strike would likely be limited in scope, according to a report in the New York Times



    Administration officials said that although President Obama had not made a final decision on military action, he was likely to order a limited military operation — cruise missiles launched from American destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea at military targets in Syria, for example — and not a sustained air campaign intended to topple Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, or to fundamentally alter the nature of the conflict on the ground.



    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  2. #2
    Elite Member WhateverLolaWants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    13,656

    Default

    ----------------------------
    There will be times you might leap before you look
    There'll be times you'll like the cover and that's precisely why you'll love the book
    Do it anyway

  3. #3
    Elite Member Bellatheball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    17,107

    Default

    There's no debate? Really?? That's why our Congress sent him a letter requesting he call them into session immediately to talk about it?

    Funny enough, this article is from CBS news as well.



    As the Obama administration considers how to respond to the use of chemical weapons in Syria, Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that there is "no doubt" that Syrian President Bashar al Assad was responsible for the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack near Damascus.

    Speaking at the American Legion National convention in Houston, Texas, the vice president laid out the rationale behind that assertion.

    Potential military strike in Syria sparks concern in Congress
    U.S. military "ready" to attack Syria, Hagel says
    In depth: Crisis in Syria
    "We know that the Syrian regime are the only ones who have the weapons," Biden said, "have used chemical weapons multiple times in the past, have the means of delivering those weapons, have been determined to wipe out exactly the places that were attacked by chemical weapons."

    And instead of cooperating with international investigators, he continued, "the government has repeatedly shelled the sites of the attack and blocked the investigation for five days."

    Biden said the administration's national security team has been in "close consultation" with their foreign counterparts. "Those who use chemical weapons against defenseless men, women and children should and must be held accountable," he said.



    Play VIDEO
    Questions about Assad's chemical weapon use "preposterous," W.H. says
    In the White House press briefing earlier Tuesday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said the United States must respond to the use of chemical weapons in Syria because "allowing the use of chemical weapons on a significant scale to take place without a response would represent a significant challenge or threat to the United States' security interests."

    While Carney said "there must be a response," he noted that President Obama has yet to decide what course of action he'll take.

    "A decision about the use of military force has not been made," he said. "His options are many, and they include a variety of options that are not limited to the use of force."

    The potential for a military strike in Syria has triggered some concern in on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are pointing out that the president cannot legally use military force without congressional approval. As of early Tuesday afternoon, nearly two dozen lawmakers had signed onto a letter calling on the president to get Congress' authorization before acting militarily.

    "Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution," the letter says. "If you deem that military action in Syria is necessary, Congress can reconvene at your request. We stand ready to come back into session, consider the facts before us, and share the burden of decisions made regarding U.S. involvement in the quickly escalating Syrian conflict."

    In 2007, Mr. Obama as a presidential candidate made the same argument with respect to potential military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.

    "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," Mr. Obama told the Boston Globe. "In instances of self-defense, the president would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent."

    Carney on Tuesday maintained that the president has yet to decide on what action to take, but he suggested that if the U.S. uses military force without congressional approval, it would meet Mr. Obama's 2007 standards.

    "As I made clear, it is clearly in the United States national security interest that that norm be maintained," he said, "because the consequences of that standard dissolving are enormous and detrimental to the interest of the United States, and very detrimental to the international community, to our allies and partners in the region and to the world at large."

    Carney maintained that the White House doesn't need congressional approval for anything yet because Mr. Obama has yet to decide whether or not to use military force. British Prime Minister David Cameron is recalling the British parliament so that it can vote this week on taking military action in Syria, but Carney insisted that in the U.S., "nothing has been decided."

    "We are engaging in what we believe our responsibility is here, which is to consult with Congress," Carney said.

    While the U.S. is considering various responses, Carney reiterated that "we don't envision U.S. boots on the ground in Syria."

    He added that the options under consideration are "not about regime change."

    "It is our firm conviction that Syria's future cannot include Assad in power," he said. "But this deliberation and the actions that we are contemplating are not about regime change. We believe... that resolution of this conflict has to come through political negotiation and settlement."

    In an interview with the Daily Beast, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., suggested Mr. Obama is partially to blame for the continued use of chemical weapons in Syria.

    "Assad was able to use chemical weapons before and there was no response, and so why not do it again? This should surprise no one," McCain said. "They viewed that not as a red line but as a green light, and they acted accordingly."

    Carney said in response that when the Obama administration established with a high degree of confidence that the Assad regime had used chemical weapons on a relatively small scale "we did respond." The administration stepped up its support for the Syrian opposition, he noted.

    "And there will be a response to this, not apparent but clear and undeniable large-scale attack. And that is what is under deliberation at this time."



  4. #4
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    57,987

    Default

    The UK parliament voted today NOT to authorise military intervention in Syria. Awkward, when just yesterday the UK was trying to pass a resolution in the security council authorising all necessary measures to end the bloodshed in Syria.
    The question now is, what will the US do? Will Obama go it alone? He's fucked either way. Democrats don't really want another war and republicans will call him a sissy for waiting to see what the UK says. I doubt another military intervention in another country most of America hadn't heard of until last year will be all that popular either...
    i wouldn't want to be in Obama's shoes right now. On the one hand, I get wanting to intervene. It hasn't been possible to get anything passed on Syria in the security council because Russia vetoes everything the UK or the US try. But at least wait for the UN inspectors to come back and present their report on the use of chemical weapons.
    But at the same time, if they think Syria will be the end of it, they're wrong. The entire region is a shit show. Egypt is gonna blow soon too, it's not like they can contain what's going on in Syria and keep it from spreading. It's not one or two countries, it's something endemic in a big part of the Middle East and north Africa and the Sahel.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  5. #5
    Elite Member ManxMouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lemuria
    Posts
    7,787

    Default

    ^^ Agree. I think Obama has really painted himself into a corner with his "red line" and other previous statements, and now there's nothing left but for him to try to justify the inevitable incursion. It sucks. Yeah civilians are being annihilated there, but how exactly is our military response going to help, in the long-term bigger picture? I don't see how it won't just bring more grief upon us....destroy some chemical facilities, but inflame a whole new round of grievances in and around the region. At this point, I'd be happy for the Middle East to do what it's going to do -- either evolve or implode--and leave us out of it. But our economic interests and fucking Israel will never allow us to do that. So we get involved in another intractable conflict and inspire more terrorists. Yay.
    Santa is an elitist mother fucker -- giving expensive shit to rich kids and nothing to poor kids.

  6. #6
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    33,259

    Default

    What one retired general recommended was to retaliate by carving a massive no-fly zone and refugee center in northern Syria. In essence, rather than go to war, give people a place to go to and make the Assad regime suffer the humiliation of having to surrender a huge piece of their territory. While that sounds better than going to war, I'm concerned that the Hezbollah would just go up there and blow up everything. Because there is nothing more godly for the Army of God to do than to car bomb a bunch of civilians at the behest of a dictatorial opthalmologist.

  7. #7
    Elite Member Karistiona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Alba
    Posts
    12,628

    Default

    Obviously not a great source, but I did see earlier on Twitter that Anonymous were reporting that the rebels had been spotted moving chemical weapons across the Syrian border back in May. If thats true then it's a pretty scary prospect, if both sides have chemical weapons how easy is it going to be to prove who carried out the attack. I'm glad the UK has voted against military action, I just can't envisage how this will all pan out. I fear, as Sput says, that if the American military goes in there the whole area will erupt. Scary times.

    Also - Barack looks haggard.
    MmeVertigina likes this.
    I smile because I have no idea what's going on

  8. #8
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    14,938

    Default

    Hey Mr. President - No.
    louiswinthorpe111 likes this.

  9. #9
    Elite Member Bellatheball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    17,107

    Default

    Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria | EUTimes.net


    scary as hell. sorry I can't post the article from my Nook.
    MmeVertigina likes this.

  10. #10
    Elite Member MmeVertigina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Your inner ear
    Posts
    3,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bellatheball View Post
    Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria | EUTimes.net


    scary as hell. sorry I can't post the article from my Nook.
    Got it for you:
    Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria

    Posted by EU Times on Aug 27th, 2013 // 523 Comments




    74





    A grim “urgent action memorandum” issued today from the office of President Putin to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is ordering a “massive military strike” against Saudi Arabia in the event that the West attacks Syria.
    According to Kremlin sources familiar with this extraordinary “war order,” Putin became “enraged” after his early August meeting with Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan who warned that if Russia did not accept the defeat of Syria, Saudi Arabia would unleash Chechen terrorists under their control to cause mass death and chaos during the Winter Olympics scheduled to be held 7-23 February 2014 in Sochi, Russia.
    Lebanese newspaper As-Safir confirmed this amazing threat against Russia saying that Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord by stating: “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us.”

    Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
    London’s The Telegraph News Service further reported today that Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia’s gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria, an offer Putin replied to by saying “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters” [Putin said referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier HERE], and which Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch.

    Critical to note, and as we had previously reported on in our 28 January 2013 report “Obama Plan For World War III Stuns Russia,” the Federal Security Services (FSB) confirmed the validity of the released hacked emails of the British based defence company, Britam Defence that stunningly warned the Obama regime was preparing to unleash a series of attacks against both Syria and Iran in a move Russian intelligence experts warned could very well cause World War III.
    According to this FSB report, Britam Defence, one of the largest private mercenary forces in the world, was the target of a “massive hack” of its computer files by an “unknown state sponsored entity” this past January who then released a number of critical emails between its top two executives, founder Philip Doughty and his Business Development Director David Goulding.
    The two most concerning emails between Doughty and Goulding, this report says, states that the Obama regime has approved a “false flag” attack in Syria using chemical weapons, and that Britam has been approved to participate in the West’s warn on Iran, and as we can read:
    Email 1: Phil, We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington. We’ll have to deliver a CW (chemical weapon) to Homs (Syria), a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record. Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion? Kind regards David
    Email 2: Phil, Please see attached details of preparatory measures concerning the Iranian issue. Participation of Britam in the operation is confirmed by the Saudis.
    With the events now spiraling out of control in Syria, and London’s Independent News Service now reporting that Prince Bandar is “pushing for war,” Russian foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich further warned the West today by stating, “Attempts to bypass the Security Council, once again to create artificial groundless excuses for a military intervention in the region are fraught with new suffering in Syria and catastrophic consequences for other countries of the Middle East and North Africa.
    Heedless of Russian warnings which have fallen on deaf ears, however, British Prime Minister David Cameron this morning recalled the British Parliament to vote on attacking Syria as the Obama regime abruptly cancelled their meeting with Russia scheduled for tomorrow on finding a path to peace for Syria, and the West begins its plans to attack the Syrian nation “within days.”
    As Syria itself has warned that should it be attacked by the West there will be “global chaos,” the Western peoples themselves have not been told of the fact that on 17 May 2013, Putin ordered Russian military forces to “immediately move” from Local War to Regional War operational status and to be “fully prepared” to expand to Large-Scale War should either the US or EU enter into the Syrian Civil War, a situation they are still in at this very hour.
    With Putin’s previous order, and as we had reported on in our 17 May report “Russia Issues “All-Out War” Alert Over Syria,” and now combined with his new ordering of massive retaliatory strikes against Saudi Arabia, any attack on Syria is viewed by Russia as being an attack on itself.
    And as we had previously explained in great detail, the fight over Syria, being led by Saudi Arabia and Qatar and their lap-dog Western allies, has but one single objective: To break Russia’s hold on the European Union natural gas market which a pipeline through Syria would accomplish, and as reported by London’s Financial Times News Service this past June:
    “The tiny gas-rich state of Qatar has spent as much as $3bn over the past two years supporting the rebellion in Syria, far exceeding any other government, but is now being nudged aside by Saudi Arabia as the prime source of arms to rebels.
    The cost of Qatar’s intervention, its latest push to back an Arab revolt, amounts to a fraction of its international investment portfolio. But its financial support for the revolution that has turned into a vicious civil war dramatically overshadows western backing for the opposition.
    Qatar [also] has proposed a gas pipeline from the Gulf to Turkey in a sign the emirate is considering a further expansion of exports from the world’s biggest gasfield after it finishes an ambitious programme to more than double its capacity to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG).”
    And in what is, perhaps, the most unimaginable cause to start World War III over Syria was noted by Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Aleksandr Lukashevich who said this past week: “We’re getting more new evidence that this criminal act was of a provocative nature,” he stressed. “In particular, there are reports circulating on the Internet, in particular that the materials of the incident and accusations against government troops had been posted for several hours before the so-called attack. Thus, it was a pre-planned action.”
    For the West to have so sloppily engineered yet another “false flag” attack to justify a war where they posted the videos of this so-called chemical weapons attack a full day before it was said to occur is the height of arrogance and disdain, but which their sleep-walking citizens, yet again, will fall for as they have done so many times in the past.
    Bellatheball likes this.

  11. #11
    Elite Member Sarzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    17,018

    Default

    Oh shit.

  12. #12
    Elite Member Karistiona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Alba
    Posts
    12,628

    Default

    How reliable a source is EU Times? That report is terrifying if it's accurate.
    I smile because I have no idea what's going on

  13. #13
    Elite Member Sarzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    17,018

    Default

    ^ Hmm good point. I can't find the story on any reliable news sites.
    sputnik likes this.

  14. #14
    Elite Member Karistiona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Alba
    Posts
    12,628

    Default

    Yeah that's something we're trained to do at university, be skeptical unless it's reported by some or many of the main reliable news sites. There are so many news sites who don't bother to check for factual accuracy and just print what they think is true. Had Putin threatened Saudi I'd imagine it'd be all over the news. I haven't seen this reported much but it was on BBC Scotland news the other morning

    Syria: 'napalm' bomb dropped on school playground, BBC claims

    Incendiary bomb in northern Syria kills more than 10 children and leaves others horrifically burnt, Panorama reports

    Press Association
    theguardian.com, Friday 30 August 2013 06.15 BST

    Footage has emerged of a horrific incident in northern Syria which reportedly shows the aftermath of an incendiary bomb being dropped on a school playground, leaving scores of children with napalm-like burns over their bodies.

    Witnesses told a team from the BBC's Panorama programme that a fighter jet had repeatedly flown overhead, as if searching for a target, before dropping the bomb.

    The attack killed more than 10 pupils and left many more seriously injured, the BBC said.

    Footage showed adults and children, their clothes burned from their bodies, being treated on the floor of a basic hospital. Many had burns to more than 50% of their bodies, it was claimed.

    Many were badly burned, shaking uncontrollably and left caked in a white substance, injuries which the BBC said suggested the bomb contained something like napalm or thermite.

    The headmaster told reporters: "This was the most horrific thing. We have seen images on TV, we have heard many stories, but we have never seen anything like this before.

    "The worst thing in life is watching someone die right in front of you and you can't do anything.

    "There were dead people, people burning and people running away, but where to? Where would they go? It is not safe anywhere. That is the fate of the Syrian people."

    A British medic, Dr Rola, who was in Syria with the charity Hand In Hand, treated the victims at the hospital.

    She said: "It is just absolute chaos and carnage here. We have had a massive influx of what looks like serious burns, seems like it must be some sort of, not really sure, maybe napalm, something similar to that.

    "But obviously within the chaos of the situation it is very difficult to know exactly what is going on."

    She said later: "We feel like some sort of, not even a second class citizen, like we just don't matter. Like all of these children, and all of these people who are being killed and massacred, we don't matter.

    "The whole world has failed our nation and it is innocent civilians who are paying the price."

    Mohammed Abdullatif, who witnessed the attack, had a message for the United Nations.

    "Dear United Nations, you are calling peace, you are calling for peace. What kind of peace are you calling for? Don't you see this, don't you see this? What do you need to see?

    "We are just human beings, we want to live. It is our right to live," he said.


    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...playground-bbc
    MmeVertigina likes this.
    I smile because I have no idea what's going on

  15. #15
    Elite Member Bellatheball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    17,107

    Default

    I'm not sure about the source as I've never read it before seeing this article. It came from a friend of mine who is well read and very level headed. He doesn't trust the mainstream media though so he tends to source a lot of independent sources.

    Kari, I'd respectfully disagree with you though. The American news has essentially become "People" magazine. They regurgitate the information that has been scoured and cleaned by the government. I realize Fox News takes it to a whole new level but there is room (and a great need!) for true journalism. None of the main US news sources qualify in my opinion. They are all bought and sold by the feds.

Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The ACLU Report on President Obama and core liberties
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 28th, 2011, 02:27 PM
  2. Judge orders release of Dick Cheney interview with FBI
    By Fluffy in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2009, 12:45 PM
  3. President Barack Obama to use executive orders for immediate impact
    By celeb_2006 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 9th, 2008, 08:52 PM
  4. Yes!!! Judge orders release of Cheney visitor logs.
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 20th, 2006, 09:21 AM
  5. CIA used Syria for 'outsourcing torture' - report
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 8th, 2006, 02:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •