Pirate's Cove

The NY Times has been doing a Hamlet schtick (to be or not to be), wavering back and forth regarding Syria on the opinion pages from both the Editorial Board and op-ed contributors (remember “Bomb Syria, Even If It’s Illegal“?). Today they find that Mr. Obama did the right thing in sending the whole mess over to Congress for a debate and vote

President Obama made the right decision to seek Congressional authorization for his announced plan to order unilateral military strikes against Syria for using chemical weapons. There has to be a vigorous and honest public debate on the use of military force, which could have huge consequences even if it is limited in scope and duration.

The real question is whether we we will get an honest debate from Team Obama or of they’ll turn this into a typical Neverending Campaign prop designed to assault the Republican Party. Considering many of the articles we’ve seen so far from the Leftist media, including one at the Times noting that the debate sets up a clash within the GOP (what about the clash within the Dems?), this will become a typical Blame Republicans campaign.

Anyhow, the Editorial Board wants to know a few things, like what the objectives of strikes would be, how to ensure that the strikes don’t escalate, and how the strikes will keep Assad from using WMD again. But, then

It is unfortunate that Mr. Obama, who has been thoughtful and cautious about putting America into the Syrian conflict, has created a political situation in which his credibility could be challenged. He did that by publicly declaring that the use of chemical weapons would cross a red line that would result in an American response. Regardless, he should have long ago put in place, with our allies and partners, a plan for international action — starting with tough sanctions — if Mr. Assad used chemical weapons. It is alarming that Mr. Obama did not.

That’s the Liberal equivalent of a a slap across the face with a iron glove to another Democrat. Thoughtful and cautious means “disengaged and absent”. The situation is one of his own making, though I suspect he was thinking more along the lines of 10,000 dead from WMD, not 1,400. Yes, that’s still a lot, but in a conflict with over 100K dead, it doesn’t resonate.

Really, though, the Times gets to the heart of the matter, which is that Team Obama had no plan for following through on an crossing of a red line. Especially since there have been chemical weapons used several times already. One would think that after multiple red line comments, there would be plans in place. Alas, no. Once it was learned that more chemical weapons were used, Team Obama seemed to be winging it. And ended up with a coalition of …… Obama and France. He drew a line and failed to meet or talk with foreign leaders, particularly Russia (which has no respect of nor fear for Obama in the first place). He announced strikes a-commin’ and gave away the plan in, I guess, trying to scare Syria. But talk was all he did.

Meanwhile, the United Nations Security Council, which has the responsibility to uphold treaties outlawing chemical weapons use, has failed to act in any way following the August attack, largely because of the opposition of Russia, Mr. Assad’s chief ally and arms supplier, and China. It is appalling that Russia and China have not been the focus of international outrage and pressure.

Syria is not part of any chemical weapons treaty. Furthermore, Mr. Obama failed to make a case to the UN, and his UN Ambassador, Samantha Power, was out on holiday in Ireland at a comedy festival a mere 19 days after getting the job, and sent a lower level flunky in her place right after the use of chemical weapons came to light. Obama apparently made no attempt to engage the Arab League, either. He wasn’t going to engage either the American People nor the Congress, till the British PM lost a vote in the Parliament. Now Obama’s thrown the ball into the Congressional court. Why? I supposed we’ll find out soon what the real reason is.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: NY Times Finds It “Alarming” That Obama Had No Red Line Plan In Place »

Darned Republicans, already making a hash of Something President Nobel Peace Prize wants in order to use America’s war making devices

(Politico) President Barack Obama faces a clear uphill battle in swaying skeptical lawmakers of the merits of military action in Syria, as top officials were dispatched to Capitol Hill Sunday to make the administration’s case.

In response to concern from a swath of lawmakers, Senate Democratic aides are drafting new language for an authorization of military force in Syria, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said Sunday.

The administration’s proposal is too open-ended — a complaint many lawmakers aired Sunday — Leahy said after leaving the classified briefing. The current version wouldn’t garner his support, but he indicated that a more tightly written draft might.

Aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are overseeing the revisions to the authorization of force measure, which seek to narrow the scope for any U.S. military mission in Syria, Democratic sources said.

Those Republicans, always saying “no”….oh. Well, I bet there are a few Republicans who don’t appreciate the open ended resolution, and some like John McCain want even more in terms of attacks. The resolution is expected to be changed in the Republican controlled House, as well. And the White House is apparently on some sort of charm offensive

On Sunday, a senior administration official said their strategy in selling the Hill on military action “will be to flood the zone.” The official noted that President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough all made calls on Sunday to individual lawmakers and would again hit the phone lines on Monday. On the Labor Day holiday, a conference call was also planned for House Democrats with administration officials.

So much for concentrating on the economy during every waking moment. Time to kiss that pivot fully goodbye.

On Sunday members of President McBombypants, who won a Nobel Peace Prize, made the case for the strikes. That didn’t go so well

“I sense pretty much zero support for boots on the ground and in fact a great deal of skepticism for limited strikes,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) told reporters. “There are profoundly unanswered questions about effectiveness, about what happens next.”

He added: “I’m a long way from being a yes vote on even a narrow resolution.”

Rep. Hines is speaking for a great deal of Congress Critters, both GOP and Democrat. I suppose one question that could be asked will be “how many Democrats will vote in favor of any resolution simply because Obama is in office, rather than with their constituents and beliefs, and how many Republicans will vote against simply because it is Obama in office, rather than on their beliefs and any evidence?”

The second question should be “how soon till Team Obama uses the issue to attack Republicans?”, making this yet another in wedge issue.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: President Peace Prize’s Syrian Strike Resolution Already Not Going So Well »