Syria May Have Used Chemical Weapons and It Doesn’t Matter


0320-syria-chemical-weapons_full_600

Obama’s “Red Line” in Syria never amounted to anything and still doesn’t. The term may sound like a hard and fast line in the sand, but the definition of what the red line is has moved around so many times that it barely has any meaning.

The original talk of a red line involved the transportation and preparation of chemical weapons. That line was already crossed. But what was going to happen when the line was crossed?

To quote Obama at various times, it would be a “grave mistake”, would not be tolerated and “That would change my calculus.  That would change my equation.” All that sounds properly butch, but in true Obama fashion is also vague enough to mean nothing.  The red line is the line at which Obama’s calculus equation changes into a grave intolerable mistake or something.

The only absolutely compelling reason for intervention would be the sense that the Syrian rebels are about to lose for good. Panic at the possibility that Gaddafi would win is what compelled Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama to jump into the Libyan War. For now the Syrian rebels are nowhere near defeat.

It’s not impossible that Obama Inc. will use the reports of chemical weapons to switch to direct military aid to the rebels or even establish a No Fly Zone that will allow the Allies to act as the air force of the Sunni Jihad, but it’s not the likeliest outcome. Syria is even messier than Libya and even the likes of Cameron, Hollande and Obama know it.

Whatever did happen in Syria is equally messy and confusing. We know it’s not anything on the scale of the Halabja attack which killed thousands of civilians in ways blatantly related to chemical weapons use complete with mass eyewitness testimony and bodies. If anything it’s closer to the reported Turkish use of chemical weapons in Iraq, not too long ago, against Kurdish rebels. Turkey is on the Bomb Syria side these days, but if Syria is to be held accountable for using chemical weapons against insurgents, so should Turkey.

Even Hagel is describing the supposed use of chemical weapons as being on a small scale. That raises the question of why the Syrian government would bother using chemical weapons to take out dozens or at most hundreds of fighters. And considering how scattered and decentralized the Sunni Jihadists tend to be, hundreds is debatable.

It’s possible that Assad is testing Obama’s red line with small steps. It’s also possible that central command is breaking down in Syria and different parts of the military are protecting areas that they have family connections to by any means necessary. And it’s also possible that it never happened.

Whether it did or it didn’t, the real red line for intervention when it comes to chemical weapons would either be their use on a large scale or attempts to transfer them to Hezbollah.

Hagel’s suddenly chummy visit to Israel with a seeming green light for unilateral action on Iran and the Israeli claims of chemical weapons use suggest that an indirect message is being sent by Obama to the Shiite axis. Israel’s apology to Turkey gave it an oddball place in the coalition as a club with which to threaten Iran and Syria. It’s hardly a great position, but Netanyahu is taking what he’s being given in the new order that includes a coalition between the Gulfies and the Muslim Brotherhood and the White House.

The bottom line though is that Obama isn’t that eager to commit to any real action. None of the allies are. They want the Syrian rebels to finish the job and they are prepared to see more weapons come their way. But they aren’t ready for Iraq War II or III. Especially not when the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which by many accounts happens to be the real government of Iran, is fighting on the ground.

So whether or not Assad unleashed the chemical beast, the red line is still mostly vapor. Obama is gun shy about another war. He may get on board with a No Fly Zone, eventually, but the timing is poor right now for anything more than another propaganda offensive.

 

  • k9base

    i say let wipe each other out.

  • JacksonPearson

    In accordance with the Constitution, Barack Huessein Obama II, have no enumerated powers granted him to draw a "red line," or any line in the sand of a foreign power. His first duty are to defend America, and not to blow a whistle and pretend he's the world's cop!

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "In accordance with the Constitution, Barack Huessein Obama II…"

      Only by accident.

      • JacksonPearson

        Obama continues to act like a moth, that dares the flame to burn it!

  • tagalog

    First of all, Syria's civil war does not have a national security impact on our nation that justifies military intervention. On the other hand, other Presidents have gone on adventures in other nations, so that Constitutional issue can, it appears, safely be ignored.

    On the other hand, if Obama intervenes in Syria with military, naval, or air action, he'll be wrong beyond belief. And if he doesn't invtervene militarily, which despite his painting himself into a corner is probably the course he'll take, he'll be wrong on that too.

    Good work, Barack. Just keep on proving that it's a good idea that second terms are largely lame-duck sessions.

  • Indio Viejo

    Daniel, I believe most Americans would be against our military intervention in Syria. As you say, if there is any danger of the Assad regime moving these weapons to Hezbollah that would be a red line impossible to ignore. IMO Israel should have the best intelligence on the subject and we should follow their lead.

  • jwh

    Daniel how are you now going to distance your self from your dear leader who has gone chemical. How about your comrade in charade Pipes the ultra zionist and Raymond the ultra coptic. Are you going chemical in your hate?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Are you going chemical in your hate?"

      Yes, no, maybe so. What does it matter anyway when your language is so cryptic?

    • truebearing

      What are you talking about…or did I ask the wrong person?

    • Cat K

      No. Have you used chemicals to inspire your bizarre post? You need some detox.

  • F.K. Juliano

    The cockroaches are spraying Raid on one another. Cool.

  • MeSoHornish

    “That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”

    Yes, but what does your abacus say?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Yes, but what does your abacus say?"

      We'll get to that later. I actually think it's a ouija board and it hasn't stopped moving since late in 2008.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    "Obama’s “Red Line” in Syria never amounted to anything and still doesn’t."

    It's not that kind of red line. It's a proverbial leftist red line. It means just what they say it means.

  • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

    The mythical "red line" and what it means – http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/03/27/chemical-aler

    As to the similar "red line" re the Iranian Hitler – http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/04/07/the-potuss-mi

    Adina kutnicki, Israel http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Coming down to the wire Al Qaeda is in the group of terrorist organizations attacking the
    Assad regeme. The Muslim Brotherhood is fighting to gain total control of the Middle East
    and Obama is helping them do so where he can. The Al Qaeda connection may be his
    undoing if he gives them aid, it will be clear then he not only supports Islamist terrorism
    but has chosen sides and his regeme is in full Islamist protection mode, terrorist
    or no, it matters not as long as who he picks is on top. It could be argued to let them fight
    it out and we go in and destoy the winner as no matter who it is we will be at war with
    them soon enough. America is not in a good place and World peace is in freefall with
    everyone soon to be at each others throats, enemies without and enemies within,
    what's and American patriot to do?…………………………………….William

  • truebearing

    The only red line Obama has drawn is the trickle of blood from American victims of the Muslims he has enabled and encouraged to attack.

  • Drakken

    Rather interesting that the jihadist aren't attacking the Russians at their naval base and other areas wouldn't you say? As far as the muslims slaughtering each other? Let them have at it, the more the merrier.

  • Texas Patriot

    America has no real interest in the outcome in Syria. Whether Assad or the rebels prevail, it will still be another Muslim country committed to destroying Israel and sending sleeper cell jihadists into America. Like Saddam Hussein, Hosne Mubarak, and Mohamar Khadafy before him, Assad is probably exponentially less jihadi in orientation than the rebels, so why should we care if he remains in power? Just reading between the lines, but this seems more like a regional power struggle between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Iran is backing Assad, and the Saudis are backing the rebels. It's probably part of the never-ending Shia/Sunni conflict that we cannot possibly resolve. Either way we will have to fight the winner. Staying out of it is the correct approach.

  • Ar'nun

    Obama didn't mean what we understand a "Red Line" to mean. It's just like all Comrades, he likes images of Red.

  • Texas Patriot

    Obama is going to try to keep the Saudis happy by pretending to care what happens in Syria, but he's not going to do anything unless Israel is directly threatened, which is unlikely. On 09/11/12 when the entire Muslim world was chanting "Obama, Obama, We're All Osama", our friend in the White House got the message. At this point, he cares about America and Israel, and that's it.

  • Anonymous

    Everyone knows that Obama is posturing — making idle threats (you better not use those chemical weapons! Or or or else!) — it is just more revealing of his character — the slick, lying poseur.

  • Mr Tact

    "The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which by many accounts happens to be the real government of Iran."

    Does this mean that the "ayatollah" and his "mullahs" may have lost control of their enforcers? There seems to be no central authority over there other than the Khameni crew, so is Iran simply practicing its ancient tradition of self serving corruption at all levels of society or are there credible accounts of a power shift?

    You do know that Obama is a classic pu$$y, right? Whenever he puffs up his chicken chest and makes empty threats from the safety of the White House, the world's bullies and thugs just laugh at him. Whenever he blusters instead of sending in the drones, they know they can ignore him. Like all weaklings, he depends on proxies to get his way. The U.S.military, DHS and non-Fox media are his Revolutionary Guard.

    Besides, the little wuss is conflicted. I'm sure he'd like to preserve both islamic powers: President Assads Shiite Hizb'allah forces and the Sunni Al Qaeda types trying to overthrow him.