The Syria Resolution: Lies and Other Talking Points
By Rose LaFleur
One thing you can say about this administration, they are pros at the old bait and switch, and that’s exactly what they’re up to with this Syria Senate Resolution. This has been sold as a limited action. Not a war, more of a “big foreign policy initiative.” In fact, it says that in the very first sentence of the resolution “To authorize the limited and specified use of the United States Armed Forces against Syria.” And President Obama has been everywhere talking about a limited strike, a few missiles over a few days or so. What could be more clear?
That’s when we all know it’s time to look at the fine print. After the meeting this week between President Obama and Senators McCain and Graham, Senator McCain had some interesting language to add to the original text. It’s under the “Statement of Policy” Section 5. “It is the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria… “ Now, I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m thinking that a country that’s been at war for years won’t be “changing battlefield momentum” because a few more missiles are dropped on their war torn country. So just how is that goal going to be achieved?
And no one seems to know what our goal will be or our strategy to achieve that goal. It’s been called everything from “firing a shot across the bow” to “sending a message” to somehow “enforcing the will of the world community.” Apparently we want him to stop killing civilians with chemical weapons and go back to killing them with bombs and bullets. On top of that, the resolution makes clear that there isn’t a strategy. Obama has 30 days from the passage of the resolution to come up with a strategy and submit it to the Committee on Foreign Relations in both the House and Senate. Kind of a “you have to pass it to know what the strategy is” provision.
Another talking point being pushed by the always-compliant media is that the resolution doesn’t authorize any “boots on the ground.” Well, once again, that’s not true. The Section 3 Limitation language of the resolution “does not authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces on the ground in Syria for the purpose of combat operations.” (Italics added) Now, that’s pretty specific. Of course, it doesn’t say they can’t be on the ground as advisers, trainers, chemical weapons storage facility security force (which the military announced this week would require 75,000 troops), humanitarian efforts, peacekeeping, nation building, and on and on. http://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DAV13973.pdf
Now, about those nasty internet rumors that 7 of the 9 rebel brigades we’d be arming are actually al-Qaeda linked terrorists running all over Syria beheading and indiscriminately executing Syrian civilians. Well, Senator McCain has assured us that he knows these folks and they’re not doing anything of the kind. And when a Syrian woman told him of her family’s experience in Syria, the murder of her 18 year old Syrian cousin last week and the fear of her family who have been in that region for thousands of years, well, he calmed her fears telling her that he’s been to Syria a couple of times now and he has the inside scoop. (below) Nevermind his unwitting photo-op with that terrorist a few weeks back, we’re all sure he’s on top of things.
Finally, remember the people telling us that they know for a fact that it was Assad who used the chemical weapons are the same folks who told us for weeks it was a youtube video that caused Benghazi. I was especially reassured when Secretary of State John Kerry informed us that he knew it was Assad because he’d personally seen all the youtube videos from the attack. Who can argue with solid evidence like that?