BOB SCHIEFFER, “FACE THE NATION”: Do either of you at this point think there’s a chance that we would have to put U.S. troops in there or that we would want to?
SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL (D-MISSOURI): I don’t think you want to ever rule it out because I think this is, kind of, as — as Saxby said, this thing has really deteriorated, and it’s not really at a tipping point. So I don’t think you ever want to say absolutely not. Obviously, we don’t want to do that unless it’s absolutely necessary.
Do either of these two ding-a-lings have any idea what kind of troop commitment that would take? I mean, Syria is a huge Country and we would be fighting all sorts of people. (You know, kind of like….um, Iraq?)
Ed Morrissey sums it up:
We might be able to prevent that with a large-scale invasion and an equally large-scale occupation that lasts a decade or more, if we can get enough NATO members to come along with us and sell it to a Congress that has been acting as though Iraq was a huge mistake. That would include having to quell any insurgencies from Jabhat al-Nusra or related groups, along with fighting Hezbollah again. Anyone up for that kind of commitment? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Funny how the same Democrats who were all like, “The War lost and we need to come home!” during Presidency of George W. Bush are the same ones who are now all, “A yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!” when it comes to Syria and Obama. I think that some voices of sanity on the left really need to speak up right about now and tell these people, “Um, Folks? We tried that in Iraq and our butts are still sore and we lost like a bunch of people. Lets not do that, okay?”
This also proves a few things that I always did suspect; that the Anti-War movement, among the beltway Democrats; unlike the real grassroots Progressive anti-war movement —- was nothing more than an Anti-Bush partisan pet cause. Which quickly dried up once Obama was in office. I am thinking that Bush knew this and this is why he would not cave to their demands, despite the fact that there was no WMD’s.
To be fair, I have always suspected that Libya was a partisan pet cause among the Republicans; which explains why it never gained in traction in Congress at all. I mean, there were obviously some mistakes made; but the way the Republicans have drummed that story up, and yes, I do mean via Fox News —- makes me think it falls among partisan lines. True, many Military people and grassroots Conservatives are concerned about it and rightly so. The Republicans simply made it their pet cause and will in 2014 and 2016; you watch. This is until it starts to generate backlash and they quickly drop it; like when they are elected. Again, watch what happens. I know the game, I have been around it long enough.
I happen to be checking out one of my many blogs that I read on a daily basis here, and I happen to see the following:
From a strictly strategic point of view, why not let Hezbollah fight al-Qaeda affiliates and let them drain each other of strength? That has to be a better outcome than victory for Assad or for the Nusrah Front and its AQ allies. An American intervention that tips the scales towards AQ would be absurd, and yet that seems to be exactly what Republicans and Democrats in Washington want from the Obama administration.
If we are going to intervene, it should be with a heavy footprint that ends the Nusrah Front’s control of wide swaths of Syria. That will take years, hundreds of thousands of troops, and probably trillions of dollars — but it’s the only way to intervene and keep Islamist terrorists from taking over large parts of Syria like they did in Libya, after a 30,000-foot intervention by Obama and NATO. If we don’t want to pay that kind of price for intervention, then let’s stay the hell out of Syria in the first place.
Now, who would make such a statement? Lew Rockwell? Ron Paul? Rand Paul? The Editors at The American Conservative? Patrick J. Buchanan?
For what it is truly worth, Ed has a good point. This whole neocon idea of controlling the entire arab world is absurd and would come back to bite us anyhow. We lost a good deal of American treasure in Iraq and for what? Some bad intelligence that no one could be bothered to verify? As Ed basically said here; lets not make that same mistake twice. We cannot afford it anyhow, and I just happen to believe that America is war-weary anyhow, any sort of military action would a disaster for the Democrats and for America in general.
So, hats off to Ed Morrissey for speaking a truth, that might not be that popular in his own circles. Being a truth-teller in politics, especially in Conservative circles is a really hard thing at times. I am sure that he took it on the chin to speak that truth on that blog. My thoughts are with him, because, as I well know; speaking from the heart and shooting from the hip is not easy sometimes.
I hate to say it, but Daniel Larison is right on the money here. We should keep our noses out of that conflict:
Less credible still is the idea that America somehow “owns” the conflict in Syria. That’s not true, and the U.S. shouldn’t be dragged deeper into it because someone claims that it is. If the government begins directly backing armed factions in Syria’s conflict, then Washington will own their actions and be responsible for them. What begins as arms supplies and support will eventually grow into a larger commitment, because by itself supplying weapons likely won’t be enough to achieve anything except more Syrian deaths and a reduced chance of negotiating an end to the fighting. The U.S. already has more than enough commitments overseas, and the last thing it needs now is to be adding a new, difficult, long-term one in Syria.
Before anyone gives me any grief about it. I know what I have said about The American Conservative in the past. Mainly, it is because of the one of the original owners of the Magazine, and his attitude towards Jews. I mean, it is one thing to dislike the influence of the Jewish right and have a problem with Wilsonian foreign policy. But it is another entirely to say that Israel does not have a right to exist and to accuse Israel of some of the most ridiculous things, most of which comes from propaganda straight out of Palestine. Not only that, but if you side with the people, whose religion says that we got what we deserved on 9/11, then you’re just an asshole in my book. I hate to put it like that, but it is the truth.
BEIRUT, Lebanon — The Turkish prime minister announced on Wednesday night that Turkey had fired artillery at targets in Syria, in retaliation for Syrian mortar fire that fell in a Turkish border town and killed five Turkish civilians. It was the first instance of significant fighting across the Turkish-Syrian border since the Syrian uprising began last year, and raised the prospect of greater involvement by the NATO alliance, to which Turkey belongs.
“This atrocious attack was immediately responded to adequately by our armed forces in the border region, in accordance with rules of engagement,” said a written statement from the office of the prime minister, carried by the semiofficial Anatolian News Agency. “Targets were shelled in locations identified by radar.”
“Turkey, in accordance with the rules of engagement and international law, will never leave such provocations by the Syrian regime against our national security unrequited,” the statement added.
NATO said it would convene an urgent meeting on the issue Wednesday. Before firing into Syria, Turkey contacted the United Nations and NATO to protest the killings and express its “deepest concern.” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said she was “outraged” by the mortar attack in Turkey.
There is no two ways of looking at it; whomever wins this election, is really going to have their hands full come the day they start work. I would not want to be in their shoes for no amount of money.
If I were some sort of partisan hack, I would be blaming Obama for this; but I am not. Obama has zero to do with this at all. He did not order these people to go to war with their own Government. Also too, he cannot really takes sides either. So, on this one, he is doing the right thing and letting the UN handle it.
I just have a sinking feeling about it; I mean, Turkey just got finished with its own little problem and now, they have this, plus Iraq is still an issue, plus Iran. It is all a huge mess and I would not want to be in Romney’s or Obama’s shoes either one. Sometimes the World around us, is just one big huge mess. Some would blame Bush and the Iraq war for destabilizing the region. There is some merit to that; but to be quite honest, I believe these uprisings would have happened no what who was in power or what the status was in the region.
It seems that in Ohio, there has been a decline in voter registration, especially in Democratic Party strongholds. This is also signaling a national trend. Here is the Story and Video via Fox News Channel:
The Video:
The Story:
“Don’t boo, vote,” President Obama often says in his stump speech whenever crowds boo a Romney plan.
The off-hand call to vote may be by design. It comes amid a precipitous decline in Democratic voter registration in key swing states — nowhere more apparent than in Ohio.
Voter registration in the Buckeye State is down by 490,000 people from four years ago. Of that reduction, 44 percent is in Cleveland and surrounding Cuyahoga County, where Democrats outnumber Republicans more than two to one.
“I think what we’re seeing is a lot of spin and hype on the part of the Obama campaign to try to make it appear that they’re going to cruise to victory in Ohio,” Cuyahoga County Republican Chairman Rob Frost said. “It’s not just Cuyahoga County. Nearly 350,000 of those voters are the decrease in the rolls in the three largest counties, Cuyahoga, Hamilton and Franklin.”
Frost points out that those three counties all contain urban centers, where the largest Democrat vote traditionally has been.
Ohio is not alone. An August study by the left-leaning think tank Third Way showed that the Democratic voter registration decline in eight key swing states outnumbered the Republican decline by a 10-to-one ratio. In Florida, Democratic registration is down 4.9 percent, in Iowa down 9.5 percent. And in New Hampshire, it’s down down 19.7 percent.
“It’s understandable that enthusiasm is going to wane a little bit from that historic moment (in 2008),” says Michelle Diggles, the study co-author and senior policy adviser for Third Way. “You can only elect the first African-American president of this country once.
Of course, there are other reasons why people are just not happy anymore with the Democrats:
One Democratic Party consultant told Fox News that independents in Ohio may be leaning Democratic – an effect that may be tied to the bailout of Chrysler and GM. One of eight people in Ohio work in businesses directly tied to the auto industry. The state has been carpeted with Obama ads that point to his bailout of the industry and it’s managed bankruptcy.
I do not mean to toot my own horn; but in this case, I must. I predicted that stuff like this would happen on my old blog. When the bailouts happened, and when the healthcare bill was pushed through. The truth is Independents are simply running away from Obama. Another thing too that this report did not cover; is that some Democrats are simply not happy with the Obama Administration. This is for a number for reasons: The continuation of Bush’s polices on the war on terror and the war is one. The failure to close the prisons in Gitmo is another. The continuing of the war in Afghanistan is another. Also too, Ohio is also a union State and when Obama’s chief of staff at the time, said “F*** the big three!”, many in Ohio heard about that too. This all makes for a unpopular President.
Also too; the economy in Ohio, here in Michigan; and nationally, just plain sucks. There are many small businesses in Ohio, many of whom are faithful Democrats; and they are just looking at their bottom lines and are looking at this President and wondering, “What on earth are they doing to us?” To be fair, it is not all of Obama’s fault. The Federal Reserve with it’s QE1, QE2 and now QE3 is not helping the situation at all. When the fed prints more money, inflation happens, which drives the prices of everything up and this, in turn, hurts businesses. Which, in turn, hurts the economy. Bill Clinton learned this lesson early on, and made adjustments. Jimmy Carter and this President, did not. For that, they are paying a price at the polls.
I should also mention that this current foreign policy debacle in Libya, and Egypt and the rest of the Arab World is also weighing heavy on the minds of people as well. As it was in 1979, with the Iran hostage crisis. Now, Iran is being a problem again. Which is very ironic.
History has such a strange way of repeating itself.
Here we go again, a follow-up to the earlier nothing-burger that the liberals seem to believe will destroy Mitt Romney. Here comes another nothing-burger.
I’m torn by two perspectives in this regard. One is the one which I’ve had for some time, which is that the Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace, and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish. Now why do I say that? Some might say, well, let’s let the Palestinians have the West Bank, and have security, and set up a separate nation for the Palestinians. And then come a couple of thorny questions. And I don’t have a map here to look at the geography, but the border between Israel and the West Bank is obviously right there, right next to Tel Aviv, which is the financial capital, the industrial capital of Israel, the center of Israel. It’s—what the border would be? Maybe seven miles from Tel Aviv to what would be the West Bank…The other side of the West Bank, the other side of what would be this new Palestinian state would either be Syria at one point, or Jordan. And of course the Iranians would want to do through the West Bank exactly what they did through Lebanon, what they did near Gaza. Which is that the Iranians would want to bring missiles and armament into the West Bank and potentially threaten Israel. So Israel of course would have to say, “That can’t happen. We’ve got to keep the Iranians from bringing weaponry into the West Bank.” Well, that means that—who? The Israelis are going to patrol the border between Jordan, Syria, and this new Palestinian nation? Well, the Palestinians would say, “Uh, no way! We’re an independent country. You can’t, you know, guard our border with other Arab nations.” And now how about the airport? How about flying into this Palestinian nation? Are we gonna allow military aircraft to come in and weaponry to come in? And if not, who’s going to keep it from coming in? Well, the Israelis. Well, the Palestinians are gonna say, “We’re not an independent nation if Israel is able to come in and tell us what can land in our airport.” These are problems—these are very hard to solve, all right? And I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say, “There’s just no way.” And so what you do is you say, “You move things along the best way you can.” You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem. We live with that in China and Taiwan. All right, we have a potentially volatile situation but we sort of live with it, and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it. We don’t go to war to try and resolve it imminently. On the other hand, I got a call from a former secretary of state. I won’t mention which one it was, but this individual said to me, you know, I think there’s a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis after the Palestinian elections. I said, “Really?” And, you know, his answer was, “Yes, I think there’s some prospect.” And I didn’t delve into it.
He is speaking the truth here. The Palestinians do NOT want a two-State solution. They want Israel pushed into the sea. They have said this a thousand times. Besides that, that land is Israel’s land, it says that in the Bible and that should be the end of the discussion; as for as this writer is concerned.
On Iraq and Nukes:
Quote:
If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I’d say let’s get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we’ll just say, “Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we’re going to let off a dirty bomb.” I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don’t have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
This is a classic foreign policy position that President himself also supports. In the case of Iran, it is totally warranted.
The president’s foreign policy, in my opinion, is formed in part by a perception he has that his magnetism, and his charm, and his persuasiveness is so compelling that he can sit down with people like Putin and Chávez and Ahmadinejad, and that they’ll find that we’re such wonderful people that they’ll go on with us, and they’ll stop doing bad things. And it’s an extraordinarily naive perception.
Again, this is true; the recent events have proven that many times over.
Once again, Mother Jones has proven itself incapable of bringing any sort of “real” dirt out on Governor Romney. The only thing that they have; is the Governor speaking honestly about President Obama, his foreign policy and Israel. Now it seems that Mother Jones is now focusing on the private life of the person that hosted the fundraiser. This very thing, ought to show you what it is, that we are dealing with here.
The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal.
American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.
The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the “safe house” in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed “safe”.
Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.
According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.
Of course, the Obama Administration is in denial mode, via The Politico:
The Obama administration is flatly denying a blaring British newspaper report that the U.S. diplomats in Libya were killed as a result of a “continuing security breach,” and that “credible information” about possible attacks had been ignored.
A U.S. official told POLITICO: “There’s no intelligence indicating that the attack in Benghazi was premeditated.”
[…]
Shawn Turner, spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emailed: “This is absolutely wrong. We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”
Of course, the Independent story didn’t say that the Obama administration had “actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.” It said that “the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted,” but did nothing to step up security. The administration’s denial does not contradict the Independent’s statement, and the fact that the denial is phrased so narrowly suggests that the Independent’s report is, in fact, accurate.
[…]
So the Obama administration is already in cover-up mode. Note how willing administration spokesmen are to take absurd positions, secure in the knowledge that reporters will help them with their cover-up.
I can tell you this; the fallout from this is going to be great. I believe this little incident right here and the fact that embassy works were unguarded like this will be amplified during this election cycle and it might just cost Barack Obama the election. I realize Romney might not have handled the situation the greatest. But this here is nothing more than a dereliction of duty.
For once, I actually agree with Sarah Palin. I also agree with the fact that this bogus movie was not the cause of these attacks. These attacks were pre-planned and this movie just happened to be out there and it was used, by these terrorists, as a cover for their actions. The sad fact folks is this, the United States of America and more broadly; The West is involved in a Religious War, between Christianity and Islam. The people over at Gates of Vienna, Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch, and Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, and others have been covering this for a very long time. The sad truth is that those who point to these sites and just dismiss them as hatemongers are just willfully blind to the danger that Islam is for this Country. The Nation should have realized this after 9/11, but because we had a President who wanted to remain Islam-friendly; the truth was ignored.
Furthermore, as a Christian, allow me to say this; Islam is an intolerant Religion and should be totally outlawed in America. There are extremist Christians in America, there is no denying that. But the last time, I checked, they were not as well funded as these people are. (and before anybody mentions him, Timothy McVeigh was not a Christian! Nor was he well-funded…) This is not a Religion anyways, it is a political philosophy, intermingled with a fascist religion and should be eliminated from this Country. If you are offended at this, tough crap; because the facts are that there is no such thing as peaceful Muslim. There are Muslims who choose to fight Jihad, and there are those who refrain from it. Because of this, America will never be safe at all. Call me a bigot, call me a hater, call me an A-hole; I really do not care. But America is going to learn this lesson of what Islam really is, one way or another. It really is too bad that more people are going to have to die, before the United States Government gets a clue and finally wakes up to this threat.
As a compassionate human being, I hate to think that people would actually be so ate up with their religion that they would act in this manner. However, as a realist; I have to go with my gut feelings and with what I see and all I see is this that is happening.
The sick part is, the way this Nation is headed at the moment, we will most like be too darned broke to even deal with the situation much less even fight it. It is a depressing state of affairs, which is why I try to avoid writing about it, because it just makes me sad and depressed to watch it all happen.
There is my statement, quote me, if you wish. Please, just be aware of this here. Thanks.
This is one of those stories that makes me want to stick out my chest and go “Harrumph!”
The Video:
Beautiful Quote:
Doyle said God is using Christians to transform lives.
“As the believers get a chance to feed them and then they are trusted as safe people, they’ve had many opportunities to share the Gospel with some of these refugees,” he said.
“And there are even enough of them that they’ve started some small house churches, so God’s being glorified in the midst of this mess,” he added.
Doyle witnessed how the effort affected the life of one refugee.
“Some of the people were pushing them around and it was mass chaos and this woman looked at me and she said, ‘but it was the Bible people that came to us and gave us food and clothes and loved us and played with our children. It was the Bible people who were there for us,'” Doyle recalled.
“When she got done sharing her story she looked at me and said, ‘And I want you to know, I love Jesus now!'” he said.
Out of wartime tragedy, “The Bible People” are having an impact on the lives of the refugees by sharing the love of Christ, meeting material needs and shining light into the lives of Syrians fleeing chronic darkness. — Read the rest at CBNNews.com
Stories like this one here, give me hope in the fact that there still Christians out there; that still believe in the time old Bible passage:
14Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. 15Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. 16Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits. 17Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. 18If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. 19Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. 20Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. 21Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good. — Romans 12:14-21
and…
27But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, 28Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. 29And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. 30Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. 31And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. 32For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. 33And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same. 34And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. 35But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. 36Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful. — Luke 6:27-36
In reality, this would mean the United States would once again carry the heavy burden of war. In NATO’s recent operation in Libya, the United States provided 75% of the reconnaissance data, surveillance, intelligence and refueling planes. Syria is not Libya, and NATO without the United States is not up to the job.
The Arab League is no match for a brutal Syrian regime backed by Russia, China and Iran.
In essence, therefore, we must stop pretending about NATO or the Arab League intervening and accept that it is not “international intervention,” but U.S. military intervention that is being sought in yet another Muslim-majority country. The Muslim dimension is important because the lessons of Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan are that, invariably, intervention leads to occupation, which leads to varying degrees of Islamist radicalization
I would suggest you go read the rest of that, as it is a very well-reasoned argument against the United States getting involved in the Syria conflict. Now watch the Trotskyite Wilsonian Conservative war hawks tear this man to shreds for daring to say that we should not get involved.
The truth is folks; we are broke as a Nation. We just checked out of one Country and we are trying like heck to get out of another one. Going into this conflict would be, quite bluntly, crazy. Here is hoping that Obama listens to this reason and does not get involved. Syria is not Libya; and it damned sure is not Iraq. Different Nations, Different battles and a bunch of different issues here. Because of this, it would be in our best interest to stay out of it.
