Putin And Reuters versus Kerry

Putin calls John Kerry a liar for his Congressional testiminy about the role of Al Qaeda in Syria; Reuters confirms that Putin has a point.

Putin first:

Speaking to his human rights council, Mr Putin recalled watching a congressional debate where Mr Kerry was asked about al-Qaeda. Mr Putin said he had denied that it was operating in Syria, even though he was aware of the al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra group.

Mr Putin said: "This was very unpleasant and surprising for me. We talk to them (the Americans) and we assume they are decent people, but he is lying and he knows that he is lying. This is sad."

Maybe something got lost in translation - as best we can tell, Kerry didn't say Al Qaeda was not operating in Syria at all; he said their influence was on the wane. But Reuters disputes even that:

(Reuters) - Secretary of State John Kerry's public assertions that moderate Syrian opposition groups are growing in influence appear to be at odds with estimates by U.S. and European intelligence sources and nongovernmental experts, who say Islamic extremists remain by far the fiercest and best-organized rebel elements.

Kerry took one pass at this in the House hearing on Wednesday:

In a second hearing on Wednesday, Kerry was challenged by Representative Michael McCaul, Texas Republican.

"Who are the rebel forces? Who are they? I ask that in my briefings all the time," McCaul said. "And every time I get briefed on this it gets worse and worse, because the majority now of these rebel forces - and I say majority now - are radical Islamists pouring in from all over the world."

Kerry replied: "I just don't agree that a majority are al Qaeda and the bad guys. That's not true. There are about 70,000 to 100,000 oppositionists ... Maybe 15 percent to 25 percent might be in one group or another who are what we would deem to be bad guys.

"There is a real moderate opposition that exists. General Idriss is running the military arm of that," Kerry continued, referring to General Salim Idriss, head of the rebel Free Syrian Army. Increasingly, he said, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are funneling assistance through Idriss.

Kerry said this in a Senate hearing on Tuesday:

It was unclear exactly what Mr Putin was referencing, but Mr Kerry was asked on Tuesday while testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee if the Syrian opposition had become more infiltrated by al-Qaeda.

Mr Kerry responded that that was "basically incorrect" and that the opposition has "increasingly become more defined by its moderation."

 

Comments

[Danube of Thought]

The Progs agree with Putin:

President Obama’s liberal activist base is adamantly opposed to military strikes in Syria, according to a new survey the Progressive Change Campaign Committee released Wednesday.

PCCC says more than 57,000 of its activists weighed in, and 73 percent of them opposed the U.S. taking action in Syria. Just 18 percent supported strikes, and just 14 percent said the U.S. should go ahead unilaterally if it can’t find any allies.

Indeed, a majority of the activists don’t believe Mr. Obama and Secretary of State John F. Kerry are being honest when they lay out their justifications for taking military action.

(Wash. Times)

[GMax]

Well its not the first time Kerry has lied so I give points to the gangster FKA Comrade for pointing out the obvious.

But Kerry knows if he admits the obvious in the intel. reports, that slim chance will be packing up his bags leaving out the congressional side exit...

[GMax]

Now given we have had a justification put forward by an immediate predecessor of " At this point, what difference does it make", I would be damn certain that if he is mischaracterizing the intelligence, that the American people heard that plain and simple fact, and over and over.

[Ignatz]

--Mr Kerry responded that that was "basically incorrect" and that the opposition has "increasingly become more defined by its moderation."--

Just like the Viet Cong.

[NK(tryin')]

Putin's substantially correct, and Kerry's doing a liar's tap dance. Kerry/Obummer can't even convince the Left with their tap dance. As Vlad I, said-- this is very sad. Indeed.

[Rob Crawford]

The left laid the rules for how we deal with foreign policy in domestic politics, through their actions from 2001-2009.

They poisoned the wells; let them drink heavily from them.

[GMax]

Meanwhile back to you Double Douche. Are Think Progress, Politico and Chris Mathews all wrong? Or is your guy in momma jeans about to get humiliated on the world stage? Not to mention how a diminished little twerker will be able to convince the American people that the government needs more funds and cant cut anything, anything at all.

[narciso]

Nusra is the most direct AQ franchise, but it isb't the only one;

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/freedom-fighters-cannibals-the-truth-about-syrias-rebels-8662618.html

[Danube of Thought]

Congressman McCaul agrees with Putin:

A top ranking Republican House member says Secretary of State John Kerry is being "disingenuous" in his estimate of the number of jihadists in the Syrian rebels forces. House Homeland Security Committee chairman Mike McCaul (R–Texas) told reporters that he was "stunned" to hear Kerry tell House members on Wednesday that the number of jihadists serving in the Syrian rebel forces comprises less than a quarter of anti-Syrian government fighters. McCaul says he´s learned in various briefings that the number of jihadists migrating to Syria to take on the government there is closer to 50 percent.

(The Hill)

[narciso]

Oh, Snap, as House would say;

http://twitchy.com/2013/09/05/hollywood-heresy-jack-osbourne-skewers-obama-
on-syrian-rebels-and-benghazi-pic/

[NK(tryin')]

McCaul/Putin-- just stating facts.

John Effin' Kerry-- doing liar's tap dance; dodge the truth, but avoid complete lies.

We are watching the spectacle of a US Sec of state trying to mislead Congress and a Russian Dictator being more truthful about sending US servicemen into harm's way. A sorry and tragic spectacle.

[Captain Hate on an iPhone]

Of course I trust Volodya more than Lurch. Who wouldn't?

[GMax]

UH OH Double Douchebag, more Indians off the reservation. When Socialist Senators and MSNBC commentators are making sense and thus making you look like you are talking out yur @ss, a learned person would take notice at least:

“Who’s going to pay for all of this stuff?” Schultz asked the Vermont senator. “Can you trust the Republicans that they’re not going to come and say ‘Gosh, we spent a bunch of money on Syria, we have to have offsets’?”

Senator Saunders totally agrees with him, and yes that will be a demand, you betcha...

[NK(tryin')]

Poor Lurch- he doesn't realize it, but he's gonna have to take the SyrianFall. Why Lurch? who else will the Legacy Media pin this on? Obummer?-- HildaBeast?, nope John Effin' Kerry becomes the fool who dined with Assad then tried to bomb him by lying to Congress-- that will become the LM's meme.

[Danube of Thought]

Obama: “Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for.”

Jean Kaufman in PJ Media:

Wrong again. [The Act] condemned Syria in myriad ways, and called for a bunch of things that would never happen and included no means of enforcement and no additional penalties for Syria if they never happened—such as, for example the demand that Syria should enter into “serious unconditional bilateral negotiations with the Government of Israel in order to realize a full and permanent peace,” and the suggestion that Syria should be banned from the UN Security Council.

[Danube of Thought]

I really recommend Jean Kaufman's column. She "unpacks" the Chemical Weapons Convention about which Obama and Kerry have been lying.

Not a single commentator on any network has pointed this out.

[NK(tryin')]

Syria Accountability Act-- those of us who supported the Iraqi war/Anti-Insurgency campaign were frustrated that GWB did not attack the rat lines from Syria which were used to kill American Soldiers/Marines in Iraq. Now this moron wants to bomb Assad for not harming any Americans? As DoT said-- just insane.

[rse]

I watched bor last night while sipping champagne which is the only thing that made it bearable. He kept insisting that "are you saying mccain is uninformed?" Well, yes.

He must not take instruction and briefing well because he came across horrifically misinformed and dogmatic to boot.

Foreign policy is just not an area where unverified beliefs and wishes can drive actions.

[narciso]

Except watchng O'Reilly would make me drink, and why would I do that,

[666_cathyf_says_typepad_sucks_333]

can I post 1 line?

[Captain Hate on an iPhone]

Robin, were you referring to McQueeg or BOR in your second paragraph?

[DrJ]

he [Bill O'Reilly] came across horrifically misinformed and dogmatic to boot.

I find that is usual, with very few exceptions.

[DrJ]

Carp!

[Sandy Daze]

You know, if I was in Assad's shoes, and a 200-300 tlam strike had been launched and a series of air strikes were conducted by America at various targets in my country, I'd wait for about a week, let the dust settle, the ships move off station, and then--if/IF I had originally used some sort of chem weapon to begin with--I'd use it again.

Whacha gonna do when they come for you
Bad Boys Bad Boys.

How 'bout them apples, Dooty?

~~

If we are not prepared to go the distance, we mustn't start the trip.

[narciso]

When will they learn;

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-04/adelson-new-obama-ally-as-jewish-groups-back-syria-strike.html

[narciso]

That's what the Kosovo and Libya precedents suggest Sandy would happen.

[NK(tryin')]

[email protected]:54-- "you magnificient bastard!":) that was the point I was going to make. I would add, Hez/Mullahs would also use that pretext to settle scores against Sunnis in Lebanon and elsewhere.

[narciso]

We can always quote this part back to Kristof;

In a column entitled "The Day After" in September 2002, during a reporting visit to Iraq, he declared: battles between rebels and army units, periodic calls for an Iranian-style theocracy, and perhaps a drift toward civil war. For the last few days, I've been traveling in these Shiite cities—Karbala, Najaf and Basra—and the tension in the bazaars is thicker than the dust behind the donkey carts. So before we rush into Iraq, we need to think through what we will do the morning after Saddam is toppled. Do we send in troops to try to seize the mortars and machine guns from the warring factions? Or do we run from civil war, and risk letting Iran cultivate its own puppet regime?"[22]

[Jane]

Since Kerry says the Saudis are going to foot the bill, if we go, the House should refuse to fund.

[2JIB4]

narciso,

Did you see this article about Hemingway sipping daiquiris' while watching Che's firing squad do its thing?

[666_cathyf_says_typepad_sucks_333]

House should offer: fund Syria := defund Obamacare.

[666_cathyf_says_typepad_sucks_333]

life is all about choices, after all

[narciso]

I was just about to link that,

[2JIB4]

Ironically, Sloppy Joe's had their annual Hemingway look-alike contest back in July.

[NK(tryin')]

Kristof in 2002-- well I certainly hate to admit it, but he was mostly right about that, (although he didn't forsee AQ jumping in to make Iraqi civil strife ALMOST a civil war -- nobody did). Powell and the neocons thought the center would hold in Iraq, and US military-Diplomatic presence would allow for a manageable transition to civil rule. Rumsfeld (the realist/believer in human nature) saw old/new scores being settled after saddam and the US needing to leave ASAP. Ultimately, the realities were dealt with-- with much US blood and treasure, but the realities were dealt with honorably. There is no evidence the Obamaniacs have thought through ANY of this as to Syria, despite the 10 years experience in Afghan/Iraq.

[narciso]

Kristof uaed the same arguments against Iraq, that he ignores with 10 years of knowledge now in Syria,

[GMax]

Thanks for the memories re Sloppy Joes. Sunburnt and guzzling beer from flowing pictures with my college buddies. Watched two very inebriated sailors take a nightstick away from a Barney Fife Key West policeman and threaten to beat him senseless with it. I became one with the floor at the open air Sloppy Joes at that point for awhile but a real life barrel chested Kojak type with sergeant stripes on his sleeve roared up in a squad car and slammed one of the sailors against the hood and the other took off down Duval street double time....

[NK(tryin')]

Kristof's hypocricy-- That's glaringly true-and based on what he wrote 10 years ago, it is deliberate hypocrisy

[GMax]

Pitchers not pictures, boy sometimes I hate this autocomplete function...

[Jane]

"he [Bill O'Reilly] came across horrifically misinformed and dogmatic to boot."

Not to mention as rude as I've ever heard on TV.

[matt]

Way back when I wrote to the Ayatollah Sistani praising his focus on the spiritual rather than the secular.He is much older now and frail.He had a lot of moral authority in Iraq in the early days and used it for the cause of peace.

It amazes me that a Christian, Pope Francis, is the one calling for peace instead of the mullahs.

I saw on FB that Andrew Bacevich, who is on the other side politically, has a new book coming out discussing the deep divide between the culture of the military and the general population, and especially Washington.

There is an almost complete disconnect these days. One goes from the red zones to the blue and it is night and day. And yet Washington is very happy to put our military in harm's way without thinking of the next steps.This applies just as much to Bush I and Bush II. What is the plan for the day after?

What troubles me most is that Obama is known to have surrounded himself with politically driven sycophants. Everything lies in the political calculus.

[Jane]

That's a better argument Cathy.

[Account Deleted]

Narciso,

Isn't it rather unreasonable to ask an invertebrate to stand up? Kristof might manage a slither, in a pinch.

[narciso]

Actually Bacevich has been fairly consistent through out, he was opposed as a young officer to the aid that ended the Salvadoran civil war, he was critical about the efficacy of precision bombing, in the 90s, his opinion about intervention has underatandably hardened since then,

[Eric in Boise]

..."but he is lying and he knows that he is lying. This is sad."

I mentioned before that I had a feeling I'd miss Bush, but never dreamed I'd miss Carter.

Well, I really never dreamed I'd be rootin' for Putin.

Strange days indeed.

[Ranger]

I think this pretty much sums it up:

The credibility crisis can’t be solved with Tomahawk missiles

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/09/05/the-credibility-crisis-cant-be-solved-with-tomahawk-missiles/

As for our credibility issues, those will be with us as long as President Obama remains in office.

On the positive side, at least the press is discovering the dishonesty that is the foundation of ObamaCo policy. 6 years too late, but better than never, as it opens a wedge into every corner of ObamaCo policy.

[Extraneus]

can I post 1 line?

I'm sorry, Cathy and others. TM was in the comments at some point, I think maybe yesterday, so I took the opportunity to ask if he had ever done anything about the commenting problems. His answer was no, but I had also stupidly told him that I thought things had gotten a lot better recently. If he comes back, we should let him know that this isn't the case, or is only the case for some commenters.

Sorry about that.

[NK(tryin')]

Matt-- your statement (brief) about Bush I and Bush II is largely afactual. Bush I's plan was transparent, once sadaam was ejected from Kuwait there would be a cease fire, Kuwait's rulers would be restored, Gulf Shipping lanes protected, and our allies THE KURDs would be protected by a no-fly zone. The Marsh Shia, they weren't our allies, and Bush failed to appreciate what Sadaam would do to suppress them-- but post ceasefire was not a hoc. GWB-- there was massive thought and planning as to what came after sadaam. Some planners' assessments were better than others (the NeoCons' assessments were the worst.), and of course the enemy gets a say, the Baathist insurgency was the easiest to put down, but the and a 2 front insurgency by the Shia-Iranians and then AQ was an unexpected bitch. GWB was made to look the fool by his too sanguine pronouncements after Sadaam was toppled, but again, it was not ad hoc, the plans were attacked by the enemy, and learning how to put down that insurgency took time, blood and treasure.

[narciso]

Well if they weren't against us, in 1991, the experience in 1994 and 1996 tought then
then not to rely on us,

[Ranger]

And remember, they lied about Benghazi, how do we know they are telling the truth about Syria.

[NK(tryin')]

I think this is what Soros/BillyC have told Obummer to do- lose filibuster vote in the Senate, NO HOUSE vote. Then bitch and moan about 19th century senate rules: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/09/04/house-whip-count-46-votes-in-favor-of-syria-attack-right-now-and-169-against/

[narciso]

Wasn't Gates opposed to the Bin Laden raid as well;

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357140/live-updates-syria-nro-staff#comments

[narciso]

This stinks like a fish market at noon;

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/357654/democrats-dragooned-line-syria-john-fund

[Thomas Collins]

At this point, my primary concern in this whole Syrian matter is that Imam Khameinei and his closest advisors are going to conclude that they can accomplish a nuclear breakout while the US fiddles and diddles.

I have not come across one opponent of Operation Red Dot who has strongly stated that although he opposes the proposed attack on Syria, he has no doubt that POTUS has the constitutional authority to so attack and would also have the constitutional authority to attack Iran without a Congressional resolution. I realize many opponents of Operation Red Dot don't think POTUS has such authority, but I suspect many do.

All this affair is doing, in my view, is making a major war in the Mideast more likely due to the perception, by Middle Easterners (Sunni and Shia and Christian and
Jewish and whatever), ValPu, Xi Jinping, Imam Khameinei, the Assad brothers and anyone else who counts, that they can pursue whatever interests they have while the US continues its dithering ways.

[NK(tryin')]

Strange Days Indeed-- BuzzFeed says, hey this Romney guy was right afterall about ObummerCare, Russia, jobs... everything.

[Jane]

Roger Kimball nails it:

As I suggested in this space a few days back, I believe that Obama provides us with a textbook case of a moral quandary Aristotle described in the Nicomachean Ethics. His bad decisions have left him in a situation where he has no good choices. There was a time, early in his administration, when he might have taken effective action against Syria’s big brother, Iran. That time has probably passed. His Islamophilic rhetoric, from his notorious Cairo speech of 2009, right down to his handling of the Ft. Hood massacre, the so-called “Arab Spring,” the Boston bombings, and the multifarious State Department initiatives to stamp out the fantasy sin of “Islamophobia,” have left him weak, confused, and belligerently impotent.

The Founders endeavored to provide a Constitution that could survive weak leaders because they knew that “enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm.” The Constitution has proved to be a sturdy prophylaxis. We’ve survived plenty of unenlightened leaders. Obama presents us with the novel case of a leader so infatuated with his own sense of enlightenment and virtue that his bumbling incompetence has — so far — escaped being called to account. I have a sense that is about change as the world wises up to the “Wizard of Oz”-like pantomime that resides at the core of this hapless administration. It will be interesting, to say the least, to see how the Constitution survives this insidious assault to which this disciple of Saul Alinsky has been subjecting it. His Syrian adventure does not bode well.

[NK(tryin')]

[email protected]:05-- but that was true before Obummer started talking Red Lines and Tomahawks. Saying no to obummer's proposed insane, and at best, useless attacks on Assad doesn't change the Mullah's thinking. Reinforces their thinking, ok yes it does, but they pegged Obummer over 4 years ago during the Green Revolution. Opposing Obummer's insanity doesn't put the USA at risk .... OBUMMER PUTS THE USA AT RISK.

[narciso]

Does this action, make a strike against Natanz and Bufhehr more or less likely, I wowuld say less,

[Thomas Collins]

NK, perhaps it doesn't matter that opponents of Operation Red Dot aren't also making clear that they would support an Obama operation against Iran. My thinking is simply that it wouldn't hurt. But it's tough for me to argue your point that the mullahs (being, by the way, more perceptive than 51% of the US electorate in 2012), had Sun Tzu Obama pegged awhile ago.

[Account Deleted]

Narciso,

The Fund piece is unconvincing. Jack Lew has already spent every bit of loose change laying around in DC and President Lame Duck is pretty much stuck with empty pockets. I suppose he could whip some votes by threatening to show up in a Dem House district prior to the '14 election but the Dem Congresscritter could always plead a toothache and avoid being seen with him.

[sbwaters]

You know, it would be interesting if, to get at Syria, a few Iranian power lines mysteriously tumbled one night.

[Thomas Collins]

Narciso, do you think it's less likely because the mullahs will rethink nuke breakout, or because Operation Red Dot shows Obama as indecisive and weak, thus increasing the chance the mullahs will try overt nuke breakout and Obama will simply pontificate from the teleprompter?

[Nick N.Y.]

Granted, Barack Obama and his entire cabinet are such chronic screw-ups that that they are an embarrassment and a disgrace to this country, even more so than the tacky Clintons were

But in all fairness to them, the bar was lowered for them. So until their screw-ups become of such a magnitude that World War III is imminent, I think that we should cut them some slack and give them at least our tepid support or some semblance of respect.

(Well, on second thought, except for Obama, Clinton, Holder, Panetta, Hagle and Kerry.)

[NK(tryin')]

ThomasC-- my point is that the Mullahs care fuck all about House/Senate repub and lib dem opposition. they care only about US Military capabilities and Obummer as CINC. The USA is at risk because Obummer is CINC, not because of this political debate. In fact, I'm sure the Mullahs are paying far more attention (and taking notes) as to how Putin is bitch slappin' Obummer, than this 'opposition debate'. McCain? the Mullahs just laugh at him.

[Thomas Collins]

If Operation Red Dot, sbw, is a feint for an action against the mullahs, I'll gladly retract my snark about Sun Tzu Obama. Unfortunately, I don't think I will have to retract.

[narciso]

The latter,

[NK(tryin')]

"If Operation Red Dot, sbw, is a feint for an action against the mullahs..." IF ONLY...
the Mullahs could gut ex-Pope Benedict in Martyr's Square on live TV/Mobile App link, and Obummer would still make excuses to not take action against the Mullahs.

[Danube on iPad]

"have not come across one opponent of Operation Red Dot who has strongly stated that although he opposes the proposed attack on Syria, he has no doubt that POTUS has the constitutional authority to so attack and would also have the constitutional authority to attack Iran without a Congressional resolution."

You have now.

[NK(tryin')]

seconded... but Bath House Barry would never cross the Mullahs... so the point is moot.

[Cecil Turner]

Putin lies for a living, and he's a professional. But . . . this time he's telling the truth.

And then, in practically the same breath, he claims the rebels are the ones using chem. I did mention he's a professional, right?

[GMax]

You have now.

Times two.

The Constitution could not be more clear on this point, in my humble opinion. Backed up by a huge volume of writings of one James Madison, original drafter as well.

[Ranger]

Ultimately, you can't get at Iran's nuclear capability with a direct strike. The sites are too hard to hit. And even if you did hit them, we learned in the review of Saddam's nuclear program, that the best we could probably achieve is setting them back a few months. The only way to prevent Iran from going nuclear is to hit them where they are weak: take out their oil refining ability and gasoline import pipelines. IIRC Iran's entire capacity to refine oil is in 13 refineries. With that, they still can't produce enough gas for their entire country. If you take that out, Iran will regress to a 19th century level of technology in about 2 to 4 weeks, when what ever gas reserves they have left are expended. At that point, the regime can not maintain control, as they will lose strategic and operational mobility for the Republican Guards. The resulting unrest that sweeps the country would topple the regime.

Of course, doing that might also result in mass starvation, since you wouldn't be able to move sufficient food to the cities. And that is the main reason we won't do it unless it is truly down to the wire of letting them get to bomb or stopping them. That is also part of why they want nukes so badly. They know they are extremely vulnerable to such an attack, and right now, they really have no way to strike back.

[Danube on iPad]

I would add that it would be terribly unwise for the president to act without congressional approval in either case, but if he decides to do so there is no remedy but impeachment. If he issues the orders, they will be carried out, and no one can prevent it.

(When was the first time anyone heard the term "international norm?")

[narciso]

While they push that squirrel, they have this;

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics
/2013/09/05/health-care-law-studies/2769377/

[narciso]

Here's where they get that nut from;

[henry]

Kind of fuzzy on when I heard it Danube. Some Supreme Court decisions conflated "international norms" and "international law" while trashing the Constitution a decade or so ago.

[GMax]

I think Zero should worry that in not that many months he may have as his trial court a Republican Senate. Flaunting the Constitution may soon cease to seem to be a risk free endeavor. And if 80% of the people are truly pissed about him ignoring their elected representatives and the Constitution, there might actually a scared straight Democrat or two lurking in those halls too...

[henry]

narciso, the local left is is in a tizzy because the WI insurance commissioner* evaluated pre/post exchange health policy prices and found 55-80% increases for 2014 in age groups and local markets tested in WI.

*all individual health insurance policies must have premiums submitted to and approved by the WI insurance commission.

[narciso]

After you, Alfonse;

[DrJ]

On the CA fire:

The massive Rim Fire on the west edge of Yosemite National Park was caused by a hunter who lost control of his campfire, authorities said Thursday.

The hunter, whose name has not been released, started an illegal campfire while traveling in remote wilderness within the Stanislaus National Forest, about three miles east of the Sierra foothill town of Groveland, the U.S. Forest Service said.

The campfire grew into a wildfire Aug. 17 and has since burned more than 370 square miles, both in the national forest and nearby Yosemite. More than 100 structures have burned, including 11 homes.

The forest service indicated it had identified the hunter, but said it would withhold his name as the investigation continued. No charges have been filed.

[matt]

NK; you are more right about Bush I vs Bush II, but I still disagree. The plan for Iraq after the Gulf War was blunted by our allies. Rather than take down Saddam we boxed him in.

But the no fly zones were more about the repression of the Kurds and Marsh Arabs after the war than a driven by post war planning. In fact a lot of our people were called back once the cease fire was signed and the consequences were brutal.

Once we knew that Saddam was back to murdering his own people again we were forced to do something.

Knowing some of the players and policy makers after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, I would disagree with your assumptions.

The pre-war assumptions went up in smoke within 90 days of the fall of Baghdad. Bremer's insistence on a complete de-Baathification was critical mistake which we paid for in blood.

In addition, there was no plan to get the infrastructure back up and running. We spent billions on a running series of poorly thought out and very expensive non-solutions.Many, many billions of dollars were wasted with zero effect by any metric we might use.

In 1945 Marshall had already sketched out his plan and SHAEF and the Gendarmerie in Germany helped govern a lunar landscape of a country almost instantly after the surrender. The Soviet threat was real and it was imperative that we re-build Western Germany. This was done on an ad hoc, half assed basis in Iraq.

Taking out the trash, providing clean water, and sanitation services are critical to the restoration of civil society. We pulled back into the bases and let AQ and the zealots rule the streets. The blame for this was at the top. They fucked up.

In Afghanistan, we had the opportunity to do something similar. We chose to ignore that theater and it bit us hard in the ass come 2005-2006. Again, we f'd up.

Military governments do have a place, but instead we insisted upon civilian beards in the form of highly corrupt non-puppets. If they were puppets we could have done a better job.

No one was thinking at the top and it was all frickin happy talk and smoke being blown up the asses of anybody COL or higher. There were isolated successes as Petraeus proved in Mosul in '03 but the day he left his successor changed the entire plan.

This was a critical flaw as every time one unit replaced another the game changed. The Marines did learn from this but the Army never did.

Bottom line is that it didn't have to turn out that way. We could have enforced some sort of order and in fact were trusted as honest brokers on both countries. Instead we didn't listen and superimposed our own wishful thinking.

[narciso]

And Bremer is one of the rocket scientists pushing intervention in Syria, Yes we misjudged the quality of the infrastructure, but how well would essentially a Badoglio regime, to use an Italian example have fared,

Libya's an interesting counterpoint, of how certain regimes, collapse,

[Ranger]

This looks like a well laid trap by Putin:

Obama, Putin meeting on Syria at G-20 summit?

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/09/05/obama-putin-meeting-on-syria-at-g-20-summit/

I doubt Barry is smart enough to avoid it.

[Neo]

My personal experience tells me that this happens when the marketing guys have run out of ideas that actually make money

OMG

[Account Deleted]

"I doubt Barry is smart enough to avoid it."

So do I. What does President Lame Duck with empty pockets have to offer? If credibility is an issue, how credible is the continuation of foreign aid to Egypt after the military coup, in contravention to US law? What's the penalty for playing Punch BOzo?

[GMax]

NEO

I loved one of the commenter at your link:

Hey look! A shit logo from a shit company trying desperately to gain relevance again.

[narciso]

This was the famous Honduras Srategem which didn't exactly work.

[Thomas Collins]

Neo, Yahoo should have rolled the dice and done a logo based on a photo that is already part of the Yahoo "brand".

http://www.fastcompany.com/1413442/lap-dances-yahoos-hack-days-lesson-monitoring-global-brand

Warning, may be NSFW (or for anywhere else).

[narciso]

It explains how slogans like this, come about,

[rse]

Jane-that Kimball comment was superb.

It was BOR who I never watched but we thought Miller might be interesting.

[Jane~~~]

"And remember, they lied about Benghazi, how do we know they are telling the truth about Syria."

I want every elected official to say that at every hearing and in every interview until hell freezes over.

[narciso]

Well Miller often is.

[sbwaters]

The price of a single lie is to never be trusted again.

They don't teach that in schools. They only teach what you don't need to know.

[Ignatz]

Tidy Bowl!
Meow Mix!
Depends!

I'll take a corner VP office at Omnicom please.

[narciso]

He's canceling a fundraiser so that's something, snark.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/09/05/mckeon-i-urged-obama-to-make-the-case-for-syria-directly-to-the-american-people-he-didnt-much-like-that/

[James D.]

narciso, that's not a bit surprising. Depressing, that we have him as President, but not surprising.

He truly is an appalling human being on every level, isn't he?

[Sandy Daze]

"...an internationally acclaimed nightly newsletter that tracks and assesses threats to US national security. ..."

Have read on and off for years. NightWatch is a usually reliable summary of intelligence. NightWatch has no known biases in its intelligence analysis.

[Sandy Daze]

lun

[Sandy Daze]

excerpt:

Comment: With this Russian document, there are four national reports about the use of gas in Syria. One each from the US, France, the UK and Russia. The three Western reports provide circumstantial evidence at best. They are not intelligence appraisals because they fail to address contradictory and contrarian evidence that is at least as strong as that which they present in support of their case. They are advocacy, not intelligence.

The only report missing is the only report that really counts to establish some ground truth. That is the UN report. A prior UN report found that the Syrian opposition used gas in July 2012, precisely as described by the Russians.

[Jane~~~]

Everyone should start saying: "Obama should step down". Get people used to it.