Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Drifting Towards The Exits | Main | Hold The Presses, Or, Everything Old Is New Again »

August 27, 2013

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e20192acc82a52970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Syria - A Time To Choose, Or Not:

Comments

rse

I'll come back and talk about Syria in a minute.

Wanted to make sure this HUD power grab was on everyone's radar. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-ehrlich-hud-20130823,0,6058063.column

Now juxtapose what hud is doing to the intervention in La to make sure schools stay diverse whatever parents want.

How exactly is any of this post-racial? It is race on steroids in every aspect.

henry

he should throw a shoe at a picture of Assad while burning a Koran for a bacon fest in the Rose Garden. He'll settle for blowing up some rocks via drone.

Extraneus

whatever Obama chooses to do the Times editors, not to mention John Kerry and Obama himself, will oppose it within six months.

Until then, it'll be the shrewdest, bravest, most momentous presidential decision in history.

hit and run

Oh, new thread. How does that always happen...

Welcome to Day 5 of 15 JOMer Birthdays in 12 Days

Today we celebrate...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY GLENDA!!!

Captain Hate on an iPhone

Yes rse; our "post racial" President is anything but. Post freedom is more to the point.

I'm trying to figure out if Bret Stephens' column is dated April 1. I think I'll see if the online comments are pointing out the blind spots in his solution.

sbw

Ooh! HB, Glenda ... and the others unfortunately I dropped by the wayside over the last several days. You guys are so organized!

rse

HB Glenda. Hope your grandson is thriving.

On syria, do others agree that by declaring a red line, bo is forced to act or we risk further incidents everywhere because no one believes us anymore except with respect to seeking fundamental transformation in US culture and institutions.

Who believes that the insurgents created the situation of crossing the red line precisely to force the US to intervene against assad?

narciso

I have no illusions about Bashir, he's more Qusay then Uday, but his main opposition are the Salafi Nusra Front, the same ones who's chief apprenticed under Zarquawi, I'm personally burned out on most of these interventions, because everyone from Chalabi to Karzai have dissapointed,

Furthermore, suppose we get some distinguished Syrian dissident technocrat, after the whole thing falls apart, we saw in Benghazi, how Obama wouldn't stand behind him, neither Gibril or Magarief.

narciso

In other news, Ext gave us another tidbit about
O'keefe's agitprop runin with disgraced fmr US attorney Letten, who is 'associate dean for 'experiential learning' at Tulane Law School.

Buckeye

I wouldn't want to make book on what they might do, but sure is fun watching Lurch and President Jive Ass try to stake out the moral high ground.

NK

Let's look at some history: GHWB-- the Iraq-Kuwait invasion, Sadam threatens the KSA and to put Arabian Oil under Baathist dictatorship-- vital US interests at stake; Dems control US Senate and House, GHWB gets Congressional 'force' resolution, does the UN dance, gets UN force rsolution and multi-nation force (including fellow Baathist Syria, invades Iraq.)

Billy Clinton: Milosevic cleanes muzzies from Bosnia, immoral, but no US vital interests at stake-- Repubs control House and Senate bombs Belgrade/Serbia from 5,000ft, Chinese consultate takes a hit, repeats in Kosovo, USAF hits many wooden cutout tanks, before Kosovarians get into the field to ID actual Serbian armor-- Billy Boy bombs Sadam for a couple of days Billy Boy gets no new Congressional/UN resolutions.

GWB-- post 9/11, Repub House and Dem Senate gets AQ force resolution, then Iraq force resolution, various UN resolutions.

Obummer: no UN or Congressional resolutions in Libya or Syria-- no vital US interests at stake in either case.

So the historical records show that Dems have dictatorial distain Congress and UN when taking miltary action, and Repubs get political support (except in Monroe Doctrine western hemisphere) before military action. Draw your own conclusions.

James D.

NK, you pretty much nailed it.

JIB

I suggest everyone go to CC's 8:49am on previous thread and watch the video interview Bret Baier has with Elizabeth O'Bagy of ISW on the opposition players.

James D.

I'll grand Zero and Doody and the rest of the gang this much: there are really no good choices here, and that'd probably be true even if they hadn't been screwing up (or deliberately undermining) our national security in every possible way for the last five years.

And no matter what they do, they're going to take criticism for it, some of which will be unfair, etc.

But the thing is, that's the job they asked for. They WANTED this responsibility, to make the hard choices and face whatever criticism comes with them. And they're both unwilling, and clearly unable, to do so.

Jane

I really want to hear what everyone has to say about Syria - but first: Happy Birthday Glenda!

centralcal

Two threads going at once, and since I will have to leave in a little while to get ready for work, I want to cover both bases:

Happy Birthday Glenda. We miss you.

henry

Meanwhile, Milwaukee is now #1. It is not because Chicago had a sudden spurt of policing, but Barrett doing his natural fail thing to undermine Walker and blame guns (not idiot gangster culture or a preference for a trolley over a staffed up police department).

jimmyk

"Draw your own conclusions."

This is the Republicans' punishment for being such warmongers--that they are on probation and have to get mommy and daddy's permission. Democrats are trustworthy and only fight when necessary so they can be try trusted. Of course, that somehow overlooks the fact that every major war of the 20th century up to the Gulf War was launched by Dems. Seriously, though, I think that is the mindset of both Dems and Repubs.

Danube on iPad

Hell. I have a feeling we're about to make a mistake.

jimmyk

Delete "try" in the above post.

Captain Hate on an iPhone

The answer is yes, Stephens is getting a lot of pushback. To his credit he points out that Lurch was Baby Assad's best bud in DC not that long ago. Speaking of which I hope the hollow shell of an opposition party remembers that the prior Secretary of State is on record calling the chinless ophthalmologist a reformer before she has all those pantsuits fumigated dry cleaned for her pre coronation.

centralcal

I know, DoT.

From Twitter this morning:

Breaking News ‏@BreakingNews 11m

Military strikes on Syria could come 'as early as Thursday,' US officials tell @NBCNews http://nbcnews.to/17bp6BM

-------

and this...

jimgeraghty ‏@jimgeraghty 12m

RT @911BUFF: JUST IN: AMERICAN MISSILE STRIKE AGAINST SYRIA COULD COME AS EARLY AS THURSDAY. NBC. | What, are we making an appointment?

narciso

Well it's like going to Joe's Stone Crabs in season, central, you kind of have to, so the Israelis attacked the most proximate site, back in February, which I'm sure the world was so grateful for them to do, sarc.

centralcal

Do we know, what the missile strikes are aimed at?

NK

99 years since the "Guns of August" 1914. Not good. The Syrian ugliness has no direct vital US interests at stake -- BUT it does have INdirect affects. Assad does the Mullahs' bidding to undermine free Lebanon and Israel, and he gives nation state support to Jihadis-- UNTIL RECENTLY. What to do that supports US interests? For me? I would have worked with Putin and told him Assad has to go, but the USA would agree how the Syrian military could arrange Syrian politics to keep Syria close tp Putin but pull it away from the Mullahs and out of the hands of Jihadis. In other words, what we SHOULD be doing in Egypt. That serves US interests. Obviously, Obummer/HildaBeast/Dooty have FUBARed Syrian irreparably, so the US has NO decent choices -- WHATEVER.

Ignatz

What is our vital interest here?
We have no direct one.
Indirectly, Israel has survived some version of the current creeps in power for several decades.
Indirectly, we have survived Iran's connections to the creeps in power for several decades.
Shouldn't Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Afghanistan and even Iraq serve as reminders of how bad interventions, especially relatively casual ones, turn out?

If there was a gas attack how do we know it didn't kill mostly people we would kill ourselves were they to show up in Afghanistan of the sights of a Predator?

If a rotten government killing a few dozen or few hundred people is reason to intervene then we're going to have to go reverse alphabetically to get to Syria anytime soon.

narciso

Sorry I had the dates off, you know they weren't so grateful, now that I ponder;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQeVEsNc9os

Jane

"Hell. I have a feeling we're about to make a mistake.'

Me too. A big one with an open invitation to Iran to test out those nukes.

NK

"Do we know, what the missile strikes are aimed at?"

The only targets that make any sense are:

1. WMD sites so at the end of the day, the Jihadis can't grab the stuff (what if they have 'Made in Iraq' stamped on them)- hmmm; and

2. A certain Opthalmologist and his general staff, so that acceptable Brigadiers and Colonels can step in and lead a new government-- think Mussolini and Hitler at the end.

NK

Ignatz-- I still believe ousting Sadam served vital US interests, well.

Irony Alert: what if Obummer gives a 'war speech' and uses all of GWBs Iraqi Freedom lines about freeing syrians from an abusive Baathist dictator who used WMDs against his own people and supported terrorists against the USA and Israel. He can't be that dense?... can he?

matt

NK;

Syria is key to the future of Iran, which is key to the general safety of the ME. I could give a rat's ass about Syria, but Iran cannot be allowed to win, which is why the Saudi's just offered the deal of the century to the Russians.

If Putin abandons Syria, the Saudis will forge an oil cartel that will basically screw the rest of the world and by the way enhance the Kingdom's revenue substantially.

In the meantime the Russians are warning of the most dire consequences if we pull the trigger.

And Obama is telegraphing another military strike. What a tool.

And way in the background the little man planning a strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program is tapping his foot impatiently.

centralcal

From FNC's Jennifer Griffin:

Further, US military sources tell Fox that the planned military operation will include cruise missiles and possible long range stealth bombers but will NOT target Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles. “There is no way to ‘surgically strike’ Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles. Such an operation would require Special Operations and boots on the ground, which the President has ruled out at this time,” according to military sources. There are contingency plans to secure Syria’s chemical weapons, many of which are stored underground in bunkers, but this first phase of the military plan does not include forces that would secure the chemical weapons.

So, what are we "striking???"

centralcal

Stephen Hayes ‏@stephenfhayes 3m

Many leaks today from Obama admin about the goals of military action. US won't target regime or try to alter course of the war.

The leaks from the Obama admin suggest coming Syria strikes are more about us - the US and its president -- than about Syria and its war.

narciso

Packer, in the course of his dialogue, has to throw a few jabs at past administrations, and
come up with this profundity,


Thank God Obama doesn’t make foreign policy that way. He knows what he doesn’t know about Syria. He’s always thinking a few steps ahead. He’s not going to get steamrolled by John McCain and Anderson Cooper.

Ignatz

--Ignatz-- I still believe ousting Sadam served vital US interests, well.--

Possibly, if we had used Iraq as a forward base to neutralize Iran. We left.

If Iran is our main ME adversary and it was always Sunni in Baghdad with Saddam in power, how does a Shia Iraq moving closer and closer to Teheran serve our interests?

Ignatz

--He knows what he doesn’t know about Syria.--

What Barry knows he doesn't know about all subjects combined wouldn't fill a thimble.

What he thinks he knows but doesn't would raise those sea levels he quelled fifty feet.

Extraneus

So, what are we "striking???"

A manly pose.

narciso

That has been our operating assumption since 1979, but is it actually true, it's what prompted the Iraq card, what prompted Richard Clarke to negotiate the basing rights, which stuck in UBL's craw, what subsequently forced us to look askance at Halabja,

Consider this, Iran has not actually attacked us on our shores, the Sunni alliance, that AQ is a proxy for, has done so twice, significantly, and smaller attacks like Ft. Hood and Watertown,

James D.

OK, per CC's posts...

Where's the hue and cry from the administration about these latest "leaks"?

Where's the consultation with (let alone seeking the approval of) Congress. There's obviously enough time to deliberate about this; it's not a matter of minutes or even hours where there's no time to wait.

If the Republicans had any balls at all, THIS is something they'd challenge. This has been mismanaged from the word go, there are no national interests at stake, the actions being discussed appear to be militarily useless at best, and there's little public support for it.

Fine, they don't want to shut down the government, or go to the mat on defunding Obamacare, or hammer Zero on the IRS or Fast 7 Furious or the NSA, or challenge horrific appointments through the Federal government.

But now Zero wants to involve us in a war that we clearly have no interest in, without even the fig leaf of a Congressional Resolution (or any international support, for that matter), while leaking details like a sieve to friendly reporters.

If the R's don't challenge him on this, when WILL they?

Captain Hate on an iPhone

I love how those tools keep pointing to Kosovo as the good war. They need to tell me exactly what was accomplished that was so great other than blowing up the Chinese embassy.

Jane

"So, what are we "striking???""

Fear. How dare they embarrass the king.

"What Barry knows he doesn't know about all subjects combined wouldn't fill a thimble."

I have always believed the most important characteristic of success is knowing what you don't know. So that explains a lot.

Ignatz

I don't know that it is true, narc, but others argue it is. It seems incoherent to argue Assad must go because Iran must lose while at the same time believe removing Saddam, Iran's greatest enemy, was part of the same strategy.

Islam itself is of course the adversary.

NK

Ignatz-- very true, Obummer blew the political advantage of ousting Sadam, by refusing to sign a Forces agreement with Iraq, thereby allowing the Mullahs to coopt Iraq and neutarlize it as a threat to them. I failed to make my point clear the Bush-Cheney's strategy to pressure the Mullahs using Iraq as a military ally served vital US interests.

The past 5 years the USA could have worked with Sunnis in the ME to contain and rollback Mullah power-- indeed in 2009 there was a chance to neutralize the Mullahs had Obummer covertly supported the Green revolution-- instead he chose the Mullahs over the Persian people. That was an early tell that Obummer supported anti-american jihadis over secular democrats. The Iraqis/KSA must have been stunned. Now, Putin/Gazprom will make the windfall.

NK

OT-- The Death Of California-- LA is on the way to being Detroit on the Pacific (PS: the comments to variety are hilarious-- reult of the Drudge link?) http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/l-a-mayor-declares-state-of-emergency-as-movie-tv-production-flees-hollywood-1200589182/

sbw

Quick, get CNN's Peter Arnett to the Syrian equivalent of the al-Rashid Hotel.

narciso

Well i'm looking at the big picture, we provided material support to the Shah, when he set up the first reactor at Bushehr, even though Erdman thought a head and saw a conflict with the Saudis, back in 1975.

We looked the other way with AQ Khan, because Pakistan was our ally, against the Russians, how well did that work out, as they armed N. Korea,
and Libya, and Iran,

Ranger

Narc, that NewYorker bit is actually very good. It shows just how empty the arguments supporting the Boy King's plans are. This bit is directly on target:

I don’t know. I had it worked out in my head until we started talking. (Pause.) But we need to do something this time.

Barry's logic makes perfect sense, until you ask some very basic questions, then it completely falls apart.

narciso

True, but I needed to point out that clueless bit, WMD are integrated into the command structure, of most of these countries, like the
Special Republican Guard, who were in charge of the Anfal campaign in the North, and similar efforts in the South,

NK

Big Picture-- but for 22 years the USA is not held hostage into supporting dictators, just because they assisted in the bi-polar Cold War against the Soviets. That flexibility led to ousting a Panamian dictator, coaxing Chile/Columbia into civilian governments and Soviet clients like Sadam and Col Khadafy are gone. Bush-Cheney focused on attacking our ME enemies AQ, Sadam and the Mullahs. The Mullahs were the shrewednest nut so they had to come last. Obummer sided with the Mullahs and MB, and supported them against secular democrats in Egypt and Iran. It's inconceivable, but it's happened.

Clarice

Gee, Henry, that's terrible. When I lived there the city was so different.

Clarice

Happy Birthday, Glenda. What will O do? I don't know. I imagine if we dream up the most inane response possible, one which serves out interests not at all, we'll be over the target.

Ranger

By the way, has anyone pointed out to the Boy King that retaliatory military strikes are a violation of the UN Charter?

The use of military force is strictly limited to self defense. Self defense can be pre-emptive in nature. But there is no way to conduct retaliatory military action under international law. So, absent a UN Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force to protect civilians, or a direct threat to the United States in some way, there doesn't appear to be any legal justification at all for this pending action.

Ranger

Via Instapundit:

Obama Seeks a ‘Coalition of the Willing’ on Syria

http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/26/obama-seeks-a-coalition-of-the-willing-on-syria/

I seem to recall when the left in this country used that term with derision.

Janet  --- -... .- -- .- ... ..- -.-. -.- ...

Islam itself is of course the adversary.

Exactly. As long as we show any special respect for Islam...we leave those people in the ME with the same bankrupt, evil belief system that is their ruin to begin with.

It was over for me when I read about burning the Bibles. What message did that send? We wouldn't want any new ideas introduced over there or anything....

hit and run

NK:
Irony Alert: what if Obummer gives a 'war speech' and uses all of GWBs Iraqi Freedom lines

Or flip it around...what if 2002 Obama gave a speech?

Swap out Kaddafi/Libya with Assad/Syria and Clinton with Kerry

narciso

Actually it's a very old idea, that preceded it by some 700 years, Janet

Whether the comfy chair was used, as left out of the piece;

http://www.jammiewf.com/2013/convicted-insider-trading-obama-donor-enjoys-a-manservant-in-prison-hes-reigning-like-a-king/

Rob Crawford
whatever Obama chooses to do the Times editors, not to mention John Kerry and Obama himself, will oppose it within six months.

Disagree -- they will support it until a Republican is in office or until it's necessary to oppose it to support Hillary.

sbw

Important read at Patterico on Letten: Bug Mitch McConnell, get treated like a journalist. Be James O’Keefe, get the book thrown at you.

That’s our Justice Department these days. Aren’t you proud?

No one guards the guardians. By what constitutional means short of impeachment, could Congress trim the feathers of a Department of Justice that feels what it is the law.

Extraneus

I don't see any way that Obama could decide to intervene in Syria. First of all, he's not good at deciding things. Beyond that, his every calculated word about Iraq - the very words that got him where he is today - could and would be shoved down his throat. The opinion polls are dead set against it. He'd have to do it without congressional or UN approval. There's no heroic potential outcome.

He's just posing. Holding a pair of deuces. I'd call his bluff.

Ignatz

--Where's the consultation with (let alone seeking the approval of) Congress.--

Now what's true is, in a normal political environment it would be easier for me to call up the Speaker and say, you know this is a tweak that doesn't go to the essence of the Constitution - it has to do with, for example, are we able to simplify making war on another country -- if it looks like there may be some better way to do this; let's make a technical change to the Constitution. That would be the normal thing I would prefer to do.

But we're not in a normal atmosphere around here when it comes to me. How could anything about me be "normal"?
I decided I do have the executive authority to do so and I did so. But this doesn't go to the core of the Constitution.
In my weekly private meetings with Republicans they all tell me privately they agree.

--things Obama is going to say....again.

jimmyk

The leaks from the Obama admin suggest coming Syria strikes are more about us - the US and its president -- than about Syria and its war.

It's always all about Barry.

NK

Ex-- the Chinless Opthalmologist already called Obummer's bluff;

Ignatz@11:06-- all horrifyingly true.

narciso

This site, explains in part why they may have continued to target this area;

http://bandannie.com/2013/08/22/

Rick Ballard

President Weak Horse may be trying to round up the usual suspects for another adventure Islamic adventure but he better not count on the Italians.

The headline reads All the lies on Syria: here are the faked pictures

The montage shows Paliwood at its finest.

matt

Happy Birthday, Glenda! Many happy returns.

A coalition of the willing? Willing to do what?

The first thing that must be done internally is to make a case for action. Then comes a plan and the analysis of possible outcomes. This has not occurred except as a reactive exercise.

We are being pushed by Saudi Arabia to basically come in on the side of the Sunnis, where many of the radicals reside.

We have completely botched our relationships with the Shia and have no moral standing anymore.

Does that mean we go quietly along minding our own business? And yet I hear crickets with the exception of the bombast.

Maybe it's time to hit the "reset" button again cuz once again there is no long term thinking.

Ranger

On the positive side, all this talk about Syria has distracted ObamaCo long enough to let the Egyptian Army take care of business:

Egypt’s Islamists cry “uncle”

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/27/egypts-islamists-cry-uncle/

The advantage of having an administration that can't walk and chew gum at the same time in foreign policy, is they can only screw up one thing at a time.

NK

OT-- the Newton School Bd resisted releasing Lanza's school records. Color me surprised..... Obviously Lanza's mental illness destroyed his family and 26 innocents.. but the Newtown Gun Grabbers demand action on 'root causes', OK.. have it your way... what did that swank town do to marginalize and isolate this chronically ill boy and reult in the mass murder? let's look a that, before we trod on the rights of millions of US citizens, some thousands of miles from Newtown Ct: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2402309/Sandy-Hook-massacre-Shooter-Adam-Lanzas-school-records-requested.html

Rick Ballard

Emma Bonnino is the Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, the press release regarding the Italian government's position is short and can be read on her official website. The essence is "not without UN sanction".

Will Turkey actually go to war with Syria at BOzo's request? Is there any reason why Assad shouldn't bomb Ankara in reprisal? Would a reprisal attack trigger a full NATO response?

I'm sure the President has all of these questions worked out in his 3D tic tac toe strategic plan.

NK

RickB-- Sure he does. Actually Turkey's Salafist gov't probably hopes the US takes out Assad, the Turkish Army moves in and runs Syria until 'stability' returns. The KSA pays all the bills of course. We are back to the 'Great Game' of 1805-1914, I'm sure Obummer has this all figured out.

Extraneus

Actually, for having elected this fraud, we deserve to be sucked into a world war and lose. Hopefully we'll survive him instead, but we deserve it if we don't.

narciso

Well no, but they would probably provide basing rights at Incirlik, or wherever is more proximate to the front, since the Jordanian compliment is a bit at the week end of things.

Judy Miller

"make sure it's legitimate"

Kerry plays Colin. Whether Assad is the culprit or not is beside the point. He's a dictator/asshole and that's enough for our sense of justice. Even OJ Simpson had his comeuppance, after he wriggled free they trapped him like a rat with trumped-up bullshit, but we knew he was guilty, so it's all good.

NK

narciso@11:59-- I agree that Turkey won't pull the trigger on Assad, they will only facilitate as you suggest, but when Assad falls....the New Turkish caliphate fills the vacuum-- temporarily of course... just until stability returns... of course

hit and run

Extraneus:
I don't see any way that Obama could decide to intervene in Syria. First of all, he's not good at deciding things. Beyond that, his every calculated word about Iraq - the very words that got him where he is today - could and would be shoved down his throat.

Always interesting to revisit Obama's words regarding why he was taking action in Libya . . . and shoving them down his throat regarding Syria, if you will...

"To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and—more profoundly—our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are," Obama said. "Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."

Obama was against dumb wars with no vital US interests before he was for them before he was against them before he will be for them before too long.

Ignatz

Eric Holder hates black kids and "choice".
Gots to keep dem darkies on the desgregated plantation, boss.

sbw

Foreign policy negotiations:

Would it be useful if someone landed a .49 engine model airplane in Assad's front yard with a note taped to the wing that says. "Boom!"

pagar1

Happy Birthday, Glenda!
--------------------------------------
"Actually, for having elected this fraud, we deserve to be sucked into a world war and lose. Hopefully we'll survive him instead, but we deserve it if we don't.

Posted by: Extraneus

I don't see any way this once great nation recovers from the damage done by this fraud and his leftist propaganda spreaders.

sbw

If the Republican leadership doesn't face down Democrats with their repeated attempts to lie, cheat, bleed this country dry, and profit from it, then Tea Parties it is.

NK

All due respect to Hit and Run, there has been a consistency running through Obummer's decisions... he ALWAYS sides with the Islamists ... the Mullahs, Taliban, the Brotherhood, Erdogan, the Islamist enemies of Khadafy. The results are eratic and bizarre, but Obummer always supports the islamists at decision time.

Judy Miller

Yeah. Who do we believe...muzzie light or muzzie Dark.

It's a matter of taste.

Porchlight

Possibly, if we had used Iraq as a forward base to neutralize Iran. We left.

I believe that was the eventual plan, but Obama and people like him got in the way on several occasions.

narciso

Ah, the troll does remind me of how the left demonized Chalabi, who was quite a few degrees better then the figureheads they've put forth to from the Syrian opposition scam.

Rick Ballard

Why couldn't the Gazprom/KSA bloc offer the "new" Turkish generals the same deal they offered the Egyptians? The Turkish military could use the Syrian adventure as a pretext for booting Erdogan, followed by a very healthy Attaturk style rehabilitation of Turkish mullahs?

What's the downside for Gazprom/KSA in making the attempt?

NK

Porch-- Got in the way? Bush-Cheney negotiated a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq, it wasn't signed before Bush-Cheney's term ended because 'Arab pride' demanded more rights over prosecuting US personnel off US Bases (as if US personnel would ever leave base in Iraq) Obummer played along to finalize the SOF and eventually the Iraqis relented about prosecutions, then Obummer pulled the plug.

narciso

Ergonekon has taken that option off the table, Rick,

hit and run

NK:
he ALWAYS sides with the Islamists

I don't disagree generally, but you are talking about President Drone Strike who (to borrow from Biden regarding Rudy) composed sentences during the last election using a noun a verb and "I killed bin Laden".

NK

RickB@12:36-- WOW, are you Machiavelli or Lord Mountbatten? That's a pretty sweet three cushion bank shot-- of course the Turkish generals would have to agree to shutdown oil/gas pipelines that run from Kurdistan through Turkey to the West.

NK

Hit-- OBL? he was a rival to Obummer for islamist leadership. Obummer icing OBL was like one crack kingpin knocking off another... it was good for Obummer's re-election business-- so he did it.

daddy

I am currently scheduled Paris to Dubai in a couple days.

No info yet from work on how air traffic or routing might be affected over there due to possible air space closures. We generally enter Turkey from the northwest and exit it from the southeast, but you can see from this map that we may have to be a tad flexible this time:

Will be interesting when in Paris tomorrow, if we do attack by then, to see how this is going over in France. JiB can probably provide the perspective from Father in Law's home in Belgium.

Porchlight

Beyond that, his every calculated word about Iraq - the very words that got him where he is today - could and would be shoved down his throat.

By whom?

Captain Hate on an iPhone

Oh for God's sake, are we supposed to pretend that Lurch and company hadn't poisoned the well already regarding Iraqi oil by sticking so many environmental roadblocks in place the Iraqis said to hell with it and dealt instead with China? These things don't happen in an isolation ward.

Judy Miller

Chalabi? Next you'll reinvent curveball. Go fish for a codpiece.

hit and run

NK:
Obummer icing OBL was like one crack kingpin knocking off another... it was good for Obummer's re-election business-- so he did it.

So that's like a time when Obama didn't "ALWAYS side with Islamists" (emphasis in the original).

Jane

I still want to know what we are planning to attack.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon





Traffic

Wilson/Plame