PDA

View Full Version : Obama declares war to bury scandals



BobaFett1
06-13-2013, 11:33 PM
Following is the statement issued by the White House in the name of Benjamin J. Rhodes, deputy national security adviser.
Related

Syria Has Used Chemical Arms on Rebels, U.S. and Allies Find (June 14, 2013)
At the President’s direction, the United States Government has been closely monitoring the potential use of chemical weapons within Syria. Following the assessment made by our intelligence community in April, the President directed the intelligence community to seek credible and corroborated information to build on that assessment and establish the facts with some degree of certainty. Today, we are providing an updated version of our assessment to Congress and to the public.

The Syrian government’s refusal to grant access to the United Nations to investigate any and all credible allegations of chemical weapons use has prevented a comprehensive investigation as called for by the international community. The Assad regime could prove that its request for an investigation was not just a diversionary tactic by granting the UN fact finding mission immediate and unfettered access to conduct on-site investigations to help reveal the truth about chemical weapons use in Syria. While pushing for a UN investigation, the United States has also been working urgently with our partners and allies as well as individuals inside Syria, including the Syrian opposition, to procure, share, and evaluate information associated with reports of chemical weapons use so that we can establish the facts and determine what took place.

Following a deliberative review, our intelligence community assesses that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year. Our intelligence community has high confidence in that assessment given multiple, independent streams of information. The intelligence community estimates that 100 to 150 people have died from detected chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date; however, casualty data is likely incomplete. While the lethality of these attacks make up only a small portion of the catastrophic loss of life in Syria, which now stands at more than 90,000 deaths, the use of chemical weapons violates international norms and crosses clear red lines that have existed within the international community for decades. We believe that the Assad regime maintains control of these weapons. We have no reliable, corroborated reporting to indicate that the opposition in Syria has acquired or used chemical weapons.

The body of information used to make this intelligence assessment includes reporting regarding Syrian officials planning and executing regime chemical weapons attacks; reporting that includes descriptions of the time, location, and means of attack; and descriptions of physiological symptoms that are consistent with exposure to a chemical weapons agent. Some open source reports from social media outlets from Syrian opposition groups and other media sources are consistent with the information we have obtained regarding chemical weapons use and exposure. The assessment is further supported by laboratory analysis of physiological samples obtained from a number of individuals, which revealed exposure to sarin. Each positive result indicates that an individual was exposed to sarin, but it does not tell us how or where the individuals were exposed or who was responsible for the dissemination.

We are working with allies to present a credible, evidentiary case to share with the international community and the public. Since the creation of the UN fact finding mission, we have provided two briefings to Dr. Åke Sellström, the head of the mission. We will also be providing a letter to UN Secretary General Ban, calling the UN’s attention to our updated intelligence assessment and specific incidents of alleged chemical weapons use. We request that the UN mission include these incidents in its ongoing investigation and report, as appropriate, on its findings. We will present additional information and continue to update Dr. Sellström as new developments emerge.

The President has been clear that the use of chemical weapons – or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups – is a red line for the United States, as there has long been an established norm within the international community against the use of chemical weapons. Our intelligence community now has a high confidence assessment that chemical weapons have been used on a small scale by the Assad regime in Syria. The President has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has. Our decision making has already been guided by the April intelligence assessment and by the regime’s escalation of horrific violence against its citizens. Following on the credible evidence that the regime has used chemical weapons against the Syrian people, the President has augmented the provision of non-lethal assistance to the civilian opposition, and also authorized the expansion of our assistance to the Supreme Military Council (SMC), and we will be consulting with Congress on these matters in the coming weeks. This effort is aimed at strengthening the effectiveness of the SMC, and helping to coordinate the provision of assistance by the United States and other partners and allies. Put simply, the Assad regime should know that its actions have led us to increase the scope and scale of assistance that we provide to the opposition, including direct support to the SMC. These efforts will increase going forward.

The United States and the international community have a number of other legal, financial, diplomatic, and military responses available. We are prepared for all contingencies, and we will make decisions on our own timeline. Any future action we take will be consistent with our national interest, and must advance our objectives, which include achieving a negotiated political settlement to establish an authority that can provide basic stability and administer state institutions; protecting the rights of all Syrians; securing unconventional and advanced conventional weapons; and countering terrorist activity.



SAVE
E-MAIL
SHARE
Try unlimited access to NYTimes.com for just 99¢. SEE OPTIONS »

Jacob1983
06-14-2013, 12:09 AM
Are you really that surprised? America loves wars and nation building. It's how we roll.

FuzzyLumpkins
06-14-2013, 02:19 AM
McCain has been asking for this for months. Obama capitulating his withholding stance is hardly political convenience especially since all we are doing is selling them shit. POTUS doesn't even declare war.

This is stupid.

angrydude
06-14-2013, 02:39 AM
Lol war on terror.

Looks like we'll be arming Al Qaeda enough to make sure we can keep fighting them for another ten years.
Then we'll import even more terrorists, oh sorry, I meant "refugees", into the midwest and have them blow something up to justify the NSA's spying activities.

Wild Cobra
06-14-2013, 03:07 AM
Why is it that republicans love a large military, but use it sparingly and democrats cut the shit out of the military, then use and abuse it?

Wild Cobra
06-14-2013, 03:08 AM
I would like to see some of that credible evidence.

Link...

CosmicCowboy
06-14-2013, 07:17 AM
WMDejaVu

Clipper Nation
06-14-2013, 07:42 AM
Why is it that republicans love a large military, but use it sparingly and democrats cut the shit out of the military, then use and abuse it?
:lmao :lmao :lmao

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried - both parties love a large military AND use and abuse it.....

DUNCANownsKOBE
06-14-2013, 07:49 AM
:lmao :lmao :lmao

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried - both parties love a large military AND use and abuse it.....
Truth bombs.

I wish Democrats actually did cut the military like Republicans claim they do.

George Gervin's Afro
06-14-2013, 07:52 AM
Why is it that republicans love a large military, but use it sparingly and democrats cut the shit out of the military, then use and abuse it?


Rumsfeld: It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it. As you know, ah, you go to war with the army you have---not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.---You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up...


the pro military republicans..lol

George Gervin's Afro
06-14-2013, 07:53 AM
Following is the statement issued by the White House in the name of Benjamin J. Rhodes, deputy national security adviser.
Related

Syria Has Used Chemical Arms on Rebels, U.S. and Allies Find (June 14, 2013)
At the President’s direction, the United States Government has been closely monitoring the potential use of chemical weapons within Syria. Following the assessment made by our intelligence community in April, the President directed the intelligence community to seek credible and corroborated information to build on that assessment and establish the facts with some degree of certainty. Today, we are providing an updated version of our assessment to Congress and to the public.

The Syrian government’s refusal to grant access to the United Nations to investigate any and all credible allegations of chemical weapons use has prevented a comprehensive investigation as called for by the international community. The Assad regime could prove that its request for an investigation was not just a diversionary tactic by granting the UN fact finding mission immediate and unfettered access to conduct on-site investigations to help reveal the truth about chemical weapons use in Syria. While pushing for a UN investigation, the United States has also been working urgently with our partners and allies as well as individuals inside Syria, including the Syrian opposition, to procure, share, and evaluate information associated with reports of chemical weapons use so that we can establish the facts and determine what took place.

Following a deliberative review, our intelligence community assesses that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year. Our intelligence community has high confidence in that assessment given multiple, independent streams of information. The intelligence community estimates that 100 to 150 people have died from detected chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date; however, casualty data is likely incomplete. While the lethality of these attacks make up only a small portion of the catastrophic loss of life in Syria, which now stands at more than 90,000 deaths, the use of chemical weapons violates international norms and crosses clear red lines that have existed within the international community for decades. We believe that the Assad regime maintains control of these weapons. We have no reliable, corroborated reporting to indicate that the opposition in Syria has acquired or used chemical weapons.

The body of information used to make this intelligence assessment includes reporting regarding Syrian officials planning and executing regime chemical weapons attacks; reporting that includes descriptions of the time, location, and means of attack; and descriptions of physiological symptoms that are consistent with exposure to a chemical weapons agent. Some open source reports from social media outlets from Syrian opposition groups and other media sources are consistent with the information we have obtained regarding chemical weapons use and exposure. The assessment is further supported by laboratory analysis of physiological samples obtained from a number of individuals, which revealed exposure to sarin. Each positive result indicates that an individual was exposed to sarin, but it does not tell us how or where the individuals were exposed or who was responsible for the dissemination.

We are working with allies to present a credible, evidentiary case to share with the international community and the public. Since the creation of the UN fact finding mission, we have provided two briefings to Dr. Åke Sellström, the head of the mission. We will also be providing a letter to UN Secretary General Ban, calling the UN’s attention to our updated intelligence assessment and specific incidents of alleged chemical weapons use. We request that the UN mission include these incidents in its ongoing investigation and report, as appropriate, on its findings. We will present additional information and continue to update Dr. Sellström as new developments emerge.

The President has been clear that the use of chemical weapons – or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups – is a red line for the United States, as there has long been an established norm within the international community against the use of chemical weapons. Our intelligence community now has a high confidence assessment that chemical weapons have been used on a small scale by the Assad regime in Syria. The President has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has. Our decision making has already been guided by the April intelligence assessment and by the regime’s escalation of horrific violence against its citizens. Following on the credible evidence that the regime has used chemical weapons against the Syrian people, the President has augmented the provision of non-lethal assistance to the civilian opposition, and also authorized the expansion of our assistance to the Supreme Military Council (SMC), and we will be consulting with Congress on these matters in the coming weeks. This effort is aimed at strengthening the effectiveness of the SMC, and helping to coordinate the provision of assistance by the United States and other partners and allies. Put simply, the Assad regime should know that its actions have led us to increase the scope and scale of assistance that we provide to the opposition, including direct support to the SMC. These efforts will increase going forward.

The United States and the international community have a number of other legal, financial, diplomatic, and military responses available. We are prepared for all contingencies, and we will make decisions on our own timeline. Any future action we take will be consistent with our national interest, and must advance our objectives, which include achieving a negotiated political settlement to establish an authority that can provide basic stability and administer state institutions; protecting the rights of all Syrians; securing unconventional and advanced conventional weapons; and countering terrorist activity.



SAVE
E-MAIL
SHARE
Try unlimited access to NYTimes.com for just 99¢. SEE OPTIONS »

how does honey boo boo feel about it?

BobaFett1
06-14-2013, 10:54 AM
Truth bombs.

I wish Democrats actually did cut the military like Republicans claim they do.

Barry likes to use it to avoid scandal talk. Imagine if Bush got us involved in Libya the left would be crying foul.

Winehole23
06-14-2013, 11:05 AM
This is stupid. Americans would do well to recall that Assad's main opponents include Hezbollah and other notorious (angrydude just mentioned Al Qaeda) mujahideen. what if they win?

the WMD thing pointing at Assad, oddly enough, serves to insure that we're on the same side of the conflict as Iran and Hezbollah -- aka "the rebels." how crazy is that?

BobaFett1
06-14-2013, 11:06 AM
We need to stay out of the shit.

Winehole23
06-14-2013, 11:10 AM
Lol war on terror.

Looks like we'll be arming Al Qaeda enough to make sure we can keep fighting them for another ten years.got damn. hope you're wrong but it does look that way.

this is a bad call.

BobaFett1
06-14-2013, 11:11 AM
got damn. hope you're wrong but it does look that way.

this is a bad call.

Assad might be a dictator but he is a lesser of the other evil.

CosmicCowboy
06-14-2013, 11:21 AM
Americans would do well to recall that Assad's main opponents include Hezbollah and other notorious (angrydude just mentioned Al Qaeda) mujahideen. what if they win?

the WMD thing pointing at Assad, oddly enough, serves to insure that we're on the same side of the conflict as Iran and Hezbollah -- aka "the rebels." how crazy is that?

Just as crazy as not backing the protesters in Turkey that are pissed off that their prime minister is trying to turn Turkey into a secular Islamic police state.

BobaFett1
06-14-2013, 11:22 AM
Just as crazy as not backing the protesters in Turkey that are pissed off that their prime minister is trying to turn Turkey into a secular Islamic police state.

Obama cannot choose his battles very well.

Winehole23
06-14-2013, 12:18 PM
Just as crazy as not backing the protesters in Turkey that are pissed off that their prime minister is trying to turn Turkey into a secular Islamic police state.maybe US restraint is not so crazy just yet, let the Turks thrash it out for themselves, right, and what do you mean by "secular Islamic police state"? that's clear as mud, tbh.

Winehole23
06-14-2013, 12:21 PM
Assad might be a dictator but he is a lesser of the other evil.not sure that US participation on either side is wise. not to be seen as a fixer of this mess might have been worth it

sjacquemotte
06-14-2013, 01:03 PM
McCain has been asking for this for months. Obama capitulating his withholding stance is hardly political convenience especially since all we are doing is selling them shit. POTUS doesn't even declare war.

This is stupid.
I agree. Plus American policy has always been the enemy of our enemy is our allie. With Iran and Hezbollah in the mix, plus Russia-it makes sense to arm them.

FuzzyLumpkins
06-14-2013, 02:07 PM
Americans would do well to recall that Assad's main opponents include Hezbollah and other notorious (angrydude just mentioned Al Qaeda) mujahideen. what if they win?

the WMD thing pointing at Assad, oddly enough, serves to insure that we're on the same side of the conflict as Iran and Hezbollah -- aka "the rebels." how crazy is that?

You really think Hezbollah is fighting against the regime that is facilitating transfer of various forms of support from mother Iran to Palestine and Lebanon?

AQ is Sunni and Iran is Shia. They fight each other not collaborate.

ChumpDumper
06-14-2013, 02:08 PM
Why is it that republicans love a large military, but use it sparingly and democrats cut the shit out of the military, then use and abuse it?What is your evidence that Republicans use it sparingly?

TeyshaBlue
06-14-2013, 02:10 PM
Everytime I see this thread I read "Obama declares war to bury sandals".

This is starting to bug me.:(

boutons_deux
06-14-2013, 02:14 PM
The Repugs claimed Clinton was shooting at OBL to distract from the Repug-fabricated Lewinsky scandal. The Repugs then for Jan-Sep 2001 absolutely ignored OBL and terrorism (because that was fake Dem bullshit sideshow of no consequence) until ...

Jacob1983
06-14-2013, 02:36 PM
What has Obama cut from the military? I mean seriously, what military cuts are you talking about? Obama is a war monger and big spender just like Bush.

FuzzyLumpkins
06-14-2013, 02:41 PM
What is your evidence that Republicans use it sparingly?

Bush, Bush the Lesser and Reagan obviously. Oh wait!

The last remotely dove GOP was Nixon. Ike certainly wasn't and before that there wasn't a GOP POTUS or Congress for that matter for 50 years.

George Gervin's Afro
06-14-2013, 02:43 PM
What is your evidence that Republicans use it sparingly?

The Iraq war