Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Sunday, September 01, 2013

Obama gives himself an out

Barack Obama has -- properly -- placed the question of peace or war in the hands of Congress. Some Republicans are saying that he is "abdicating responsibility," a sentiment I find grimly amusing, since the framers of the Constitution would have been infuriated by the thought of a President going to war without congressional authorization.

Maybe Obama hopes to give himself a way to back out gracefully. Maybe Obama really is playing 11-dimensional chess. If his die-hard followers want to so interpret this decision, fine by me.

At this time, all I care about is the maintenance of peace and the establishment of truth. And the truth, as I see it, comes to this: The administration has not given us any hard proof that Assad ordered militarily-useless chemical attacks on civilians.

Very soon, I'll publish another post making the case that we've been played for suckers. The purpose of this post is to emphasize that that we can help history take a better course. In the UK, Parliament did the right thing. Americans should force their Congress to do likewise.

The upcoming vote on war or peace will create strange bedfellows and non-intuitive coalitions. Many Democrats will support a strike, and many Republicans will oppose. The GOP is split between neocons and libertarians. I don't envy the poor bastards: They must now decide whether they love war more than they hate Obama. I think many of them are so anxious to annoy a Democratic president that they will even countenance peace.

In this unusual moment, partisan concerns do not matter to me very much. What matters is this: We should stay out of Syria's civil war. We should never loose our engines of mass death based on iffy evidence provided by the Israeli intelligence services, or any other foreign service. All foreign nations have their own agendas, and all spooks live to deceive. We must dance to our own tune, not to anyone else's.

So contact your congressional representative and your senators. (You may also want to try this excellent strategy.) Do not listen to the defeatists who will tell you not to bother because the fix is in. The polls favor peace. Success is possible -- and even if it isn't, a noble failure always beats acquiescence.

And please pass along the post below, in which I show evidence indicating that the United States may now be the victim of the same trick played on us back in 1986.
Republicans against going to war ,,, well I never.
They must really hate Obama to the Nth degree if they turn down a chance to make some money for their Masters!
Of course the bought off Democrats, especially in the senate, are not much better, which is why I didn't even bother to contact Beauregard Sessions or Secret Leaker Shelby.

I did send an email to my rep. ( I refuse to honor him with a capital r) , Mo Brooks, telling him basically that if a dumb ass like me can see what the f is going on, and that even I know what former General Clark said was reviled to him weeks after 9-11-2001, (and understood by all non brain dead Americans), as to the imperialistic aims of the war mongers amongst us, that surely a wise man such as himself must knows better than to vote to attack Syrian on BS Intel and ginned up excuses.

Then again Mo is from Madison, Al. Just 15 minutes from Huntsville - home to Redstone Arsenal - Redstone being the only reason Huntsville and Madison exist as more than mere bumps in the road.

I fully expect to get a personal form letter telling how important it is for America to stand up for Human Rights and how dangerous ASSad is to the security of the United States.
Then again, he just might hate Obama enough to do the right thing in spite of his Basic Instincts.

The letter idea is good....I wish we could mount a postcard drive, but ANY contact works and is imperative! I left messages on this holiday weekend, and I will call back later in the week to see if they "got" the message.
Okay Obama surprised me. Not sure if this is Biden's influence or simply POTUS's sense of self-survival [unilaterally deciding to go in would have the 'impeach him now' crowd screaming for blood]. The fact that Obama IMHO did the right thing, the Constitutionally demanding thing, flies in the face of the ever-expanding power of the Executive, where Congress gets to abdicate any and all responsibility. It should be interesting to watch our so-called representatives wriggle on the hook.

I listened to Pepe Escobar on RT News last night. He claims Obama is absolutely clueless with clueless types advising him and who he's listening to [Powers, Wright & Jarrett]. He said quite bluntly that in the 'real' world the forces pushing for war is Bandar Bush & Israel, both with different agendas but with the sole desire to push the US into taking out Assad.

So . . . by delaying this mess, Obama takes the wind out of the war-mongering sails, puts the onus on Congress and maybe, just maybe stops a disastrous intervention that could throw the whole region into an uncontrollable meltdown.

We shall see.

Oops. Wright should be Rice in the post above. Obviously Escobar has little respect for the three sisters of wisdom.

Something else I read yesterday. You might have already mentioned this, Joe, through one of your links. There are gazillion conflicting reports out there--hard to keep them all straight--but this one I found intriguing: a female rebel claimed that weapons supplied by the Saudis were, in fact, CWs without any advance notice. I'd also read a report where several rebels died in their tunnels from leaking gas canisters. They had no idea what they were handling.

So, the outside players [the Saudis, Israel et al] could have set this whole thing in motion to drag the US into a military response. Obama boxed himself in with the 'red line' statement but has put on the brakes with insisting on a Congressional vote.

The world is a very complicated tangle of conflicting interests. Whatever Obama's reasoning [self-serving or not], I think he's done the exact right thing to slow this battlewagon down.

sorta on topic,

Was this stuff the source? Stored along with sodium fluoride (for good tooth enamel !)

Sold to Syria 10 months after rebellion began.

"Export licences for potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride were granted months after the bloody civil war in the Middle East began."

just an fyi


What I am really curious about is the neocon rationale. What kind of long term aim? Where is this really taking us?

Is the idea to dismantle the states that surround Israel to make sure they do not present a threat? Could that really work?

Is the idea to embed the US in the region to ensure it controls the flow of oil?

According to Wesley Clark, the neocon plan was 7 countries conquered in 5 years. We’re a bit off schedule.

The 7 included Iraq, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, & the Sudan. Why? To make us King of the Mountain, owner of desirable resources in 21st century. And secure Israel’s place in the region.

Demented enough? I think so. So, forget all that nonsense about bringing democracy to the ME. That's the neocon's sorry cover story. It's also the reason why they should never be allowed to have power again. We have enough problems with Obama in the cat seat.

Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic