Skip to main content

View Diary: Sen. Heinrich on Syria, and a Response (89 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  DD, I hope your post stays on the rec list (16+ / 0-)

    long enough to get some eyes.

    With that in mind, I post the following as an open comment to all who've latched on to the flavor-of-the-day meme that Obama's threat to attack Syria was designed to achieve the diplomatic track now being explored:

    That meme is bullshit. We and Obama are just fortunate that Russia was savvy enough to seize upon Kerry's throw away remark to actually put a non-aggressive proposal on the table.

    Think about it. Had Obama intended to use the threat of a cruise missile strike as a stick to force Assad to relinquish control of his CW, THAT would have been the stated condition from the gitgo.

    Had Obama, the very day the CW attack was confirmed, stated "Unless Assad agrees to turn his CW stockpiles over to international control, then we will attack militarily," he would have likely had the support of the majority of the American people. That would have been perceived to be a reasonable, judicious framing that supported the proposition that the U.S. does not want to be militarily engaged in yet another ME country.

    There would have been absolutely no downside to making that case from Day One. (Many of us would still have been opposed to the sabre rattling even then, but we peaceniks would have been standing on much less firm ground in terms of popular opinion.)

    The reason Kerry has been running around frantically, day after day after day, screeching "Munich," without, until now, proposing the one condition that would forestall an attack, is that the goal was NEVER about getting Assad to hand over his WMD for disposal. WHATEVER Obama's goal and motivation for his intended course of action was prior to today, it could NOT have been to engineer today's development - it fails any test of logic to imagine he would have kept in his back pocket the ONE argument that likely would have found favor with the populace from the beginning.

    Again, we are fortunate that, amidst this amateurish display of how NOT to conduct foreign policy, Russia's action today may have saved many Syrian civilians from missile mayhem, on top of all that they're currently suffering at the hands of the warring parties.

    This site's stated mission is absurdly contradictory. You don't get better Democrats by electing more Democrats. The latter is achieved by lowering the bar, not by raising it.

    by WisePiper on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:29:33 PM PDT

    •  War party is over (0+ / 0-)

      That's how your earn a Peace prize.  Let the Russians and Iranians act responsibly.  Give the Syrian people a break.  A taste of peace may give it a chance.

      If we want to protect Saudiis, Quatar, and Israel,  do we have to obliterate Syria as a free fire zone.  Real people live there.  

       

      Barack Hussein Obama- Don't Mock the Constitution.

      by odenthal on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 05:19:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hey, WP, this plan was discussed (0+ / 0-)

      with Putin at the g-20 and Kerry has been talking with Russia's FM for several weeks. They weren't willing to budge until the threat had become very real to them and Assad.

      Why do you think Obama decided to take it to Congress — and then didn't call congress back into session? Could it have been playing for time? Why do you think he has made comments about not ruling out a strike if Congress didn't vote for it? Was he giving Putin more time; putting more pressure on Assad?

      How do you think it would have kept Assad from stalling if Obama said unless you ... then we will attack? Assad had to be staring down the barrel to yield as he did.

      I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

      by samddobermann on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 05:49:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Again, give one convincing reason why (4+ / 0-)

        Obama didn't publicly announce weeks ago that an attack could be forestalled if Syria turned its CW over to the international community for disposal. What sense did it make to keep secret the carrot/stick scenario, while support for the proposed attack continued to evaporate both domestically and internationally? How could this demonstrable lack of support not embolden Assad to ignore any demands of the U.S.?

        Face it - Obama intended to deliver "consequences" to Assad, one way or another.The idea that he was secretly offering an out through back channels is absurd.

        This site's stated mission is absurdly contradictory. You don't get better Democrats by electing more Democrats. The latter is achieved by lowering the bar, not by raising it.

        by WisePiper on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 06:28:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I second you, WisePiper. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dallasdoc

      DD is one of the brightest, most thoughtful writers on this site. Reading his comments/diaries has always been a special treat for this kossack! T and R!!

      Through thoughts, words and actions, we live the truth we know. -- L. Spencer

      by orlbucfan on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 06:42:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site