We now know where President Obama stands vis-a-vis the use of US force against the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad.
It is in the movement or use of chemical or biological weapons. In his strongest statement to date, President Obama said today:
"We have been very clear to the Assad regime -- but also to other players on the ground -- that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus; that would change my equation."
Perhaps “a whole bunch” is not the most exact or presidential use of the English language, but I feel sure that al-Assad has understood the message.
The American President added, "We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that's a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons."
A senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told CNN last month that Syria has "probably has the largest and most advanced chemical warfare program in the Arab world,” including "thousands of tube and rocket artillery rounds filled with mustard-type blister agents, thousands of bombs filled with the nerve agents sarin and possibly VX , and binary-type and cluster Chemical Weapons warheads filled with nerve agents for all its major missile systems…and production facilities and numerous storage sites, mostly dispersed throughout the western half of the country.”
Syria is also believed to have a biological warfare research and development program.
One wonders what the result would have been, dear readers, if President Obama had taken such a tough stance 18 months ago concerning the general mayhem and massacres engaged in by al-Assaad and his forces against his own people. Would we today not be counting 20,000 dead but many fewer.
And, would the world be more secure knowing that Syria could be and was contained simply because the American President had spoken out forcefully and bluntly.
It is not always easy to put one’s word on the line -- to commit one’s forces to preserving peace and the lives of innocents. But, sometimes it must be done.
And for the better part of the past century, it has been up to the US President to draw the line, with the American military to back him up.
In the case of Syria, it is tragic that Mr. Obama has learned this lesson so late.
If the Syrians or a Syrian friendly nation starts to move the vast chemical weapons stock pile and indicate they will trespass the line drawn by Obama, do we better dos anyone really believe he'll do anytime strategic. Or is this newest vocal outburst simply political campaign rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteI think his only decision maker would be the value of a WAR TIME PRESIDENT in a presidential election in the final 60 days.
Additional would the Syrians and/or their close friends institute movement just to have Obama re-elected since they now know his taste for confrontation in the region.
As the little Shepard boy learned the hard way you can only cry wolf , without a wolf being present before people start to ignore your cry's.
After 3 years and 7 months in office why should Obama start doing anything now???
ReplyDeleteI think it's all talk. Or is it his cue for them to do someting more than they have already done, like anonymous alluded to. Do you really think he might have learned a lesson? I don't think this fits in his idea of change. And I certainly don't see him militarily in command. I don't trust him.
ReplyDelete