Trying to understand Syria

Sundance at The Last Refuge must be the hardest working blogger. Today he gives us much more background information on Syria.

...If the Russian military and the entire Syrian military wanted to eliminate ISIS in Syria (said to be approximately 30k +/-), they could do so rather quickly. They’ve had over a year to assemble enough military personnel and military armament to defeat that enemy.

They have not done so because it doesn’t fit the current agenda: keeping Assad in power.

President Trump is breaking up the availability of Assad (Russia and Iran) to hide behind the useful foil of their opposition to ISIS.

If another chemical attack takes place, Bashir Assad runs the risk of being removed. And the entire world, sans Russia and Iran, will see the removal action as justified.

Remember, the primary goal of Russia and Iran is to keep Assad in power.

♦ If Bashir Assad did not carry out the prior chemical attack, he, and Russia, is now in a position of having to make sure that another attack doesn’t take place, ever. This means Russia and Assad need to re-engage the fight against whomever ‘might’ carry out another chemical attack. (Trump wins)

♦ If Bashir Assad did carry out the prior chemical attack, he and Russia, are now unable to use that action against Assad’s political opposition. (Trump wins)

President Trump has assigned responsibility, and given consequences. President Trump is forcing Assad (and Russia/Iran) to: #1) fight ISIS, and #2) stop targeting Assad’s political opposition; at least with chemical weapons.

And THAT is the exact response Assad gave after the 59 tomahawk missiles struck the Syrian airbase. See: “Assad promises to fight ISIS harder.” This is also one of the reasons why the targeted airbase is still operational.

Now pay attention to Secretary Tillerson:

Overall, the situation in Syria is one where our approach today and our policy today is, first, to defeat ISIS. By defeating ISIS we remove one of the disruptive elements in Syria that exists today.

That begins to clarify for us opposition forces and regime forces. In working with the coalition — as you know, there is a large coalition of international players and allies who are involved in the future resolution in Syria.

So it’s to defeat ISIS; it’s to begin to stabilize areas of Syria, stabilize areas in the south of Syria, stabilize areas around Raqqa through ceasefire agreements between the Syrian regime forces and opposition forces. Stabilize those areas; begin to restore some normalcy to them. Restore them to local governance — and there are local leaders who are ready to return, some who have left as refugees — they’re ready to return to govern these areas.

Use local forces that will be part of the liberation effort to develop the local security forces — law enforcement, police force. And then use other forces to create outer perimeters of security so that areas like Raqqa, areas in the south can begin to provide a secure environment so refugees can begin to go home and begin the rebuilding process.

In the midst of that, through the Geneva Process, we will start a political process to resolve Syria’s future in terms of its governance structure, and that ultimately, in our view, will lead to a resolution of Bashar al-Assad’s departure.

~ Secretary Tillerson during Air-Strike Debrief

And Obama and Kerry? Sundance has a video in which Kerry admits arming oppositon groups.

Read more here.

Never fear, Kerry's here.

hat tip Theo

Who is the nutty one?

Applauding the progress of Iran on a marked highway to nuclear weapons

Hugh Hewitt writes in the Washington Examiner,

President Obama's catastrophic tenure at 1600 Pennsylvania, like Hillary Clinton's catastrophic tenure at Foggy Bottom (the Russian "reset," the trial run for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the launching of the Libyan chaos, the hasty withdrawal from Iraq and the subsequent vacuum into which the Islamic State moved) will be remembered hardly at all once Iran gets the bomb as now guaranteed. Guaranteed. That is the bottom line of the Iran "deal." Iran is now a legitimized "soon-to-be" nuclear state. Children born today won't have started "world history" in 9th grade before Iran has nukes.

So Obama and Clinton are applauding the progress of Iran on a marked highway to nuclear weapons. Thy cheer this as an improvement over the haphazard back roads the mullahs have been imperfectly traveling. It isn't an improvement. It is a disaster. It is an unimaginable carnage just over the horizon that only the intentionally dense or the unbelievably naive cannot foresee.

...Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani is laughing. He has won. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini has won from beyond the grave. The clock is ticking and the bright light is coming. Thank you President Obama, Secretary Kerry and Secretary Clinton. Sen. Schumer, your "courage" will not be forgotten either.

Read more here.

Caving to Iran

No deal is better than the Obama/Kerry Iran deal

Charles Krauthammer puts all aspects of the Iran nuclear deal under his analytical microscope, and concludes,

You set out to prevent proliferation and you trigger it. You set out to prevent an Iranian nuclear capability and you legitimize it. You set out to constrain the world’s greatest exporter of terror threatening every one of our allies in the Middle East and you’re on the verge of making it the region’s economic and military hegemon.

Read more here.

Obama and Kerry pouting about Netanyahu again

Benjamin Netanyahu will be addressing a joint session of Congress on March 3, which is two weeks before the Israeli election. Both Obama and Kerry have said that they will not meet with Netanyahu. Netanyahu wants Congress to do more to stop Iran from going nuclear. Read more here.

Ending wars instead of winning them

Seth Mandel writes:

President Obama has long been criticized for wanting to “end” wars instead of win them, painting a picture of a fatigued America on the run. Western Europe has not exactly been a model of resolve in the face of aggression either. But Israelis don’t have the luxury of retreat and can’t treat as quaint the notion of victory. Military victory, in fact, has been the necessary precursor to peace for Israel.

Hamas once again appears to be on the ropes. A ceasefire that truly brings peace and prevents future war and terror is surely desirable. In its absence, the Israeli government shouldn’t be blamed for pursuing victory.

Please read more here.

What the US can do to help the people of Israel and Gaza

Caroline Glick is one of the best writers I read. She has written a very clear summary of the Israeli-Hamas war. She no longer believes a ceasefire is possible. She writes about what she understands to be Hamas' rationale for fighting, and then gives very explicit suggestions for what the United States can do to help the people of Israel and the people of Gaza. I will excerpt her column here, but I urge readers to go read her whole column.

Why did Hamas attack the Givati forces, kill two soldiers and capture 2nd. Lt. Hadar Goldin Friday morning in violation of the US-UN brokered 72-hour cease fire?

Hamas acted as it did, because it thinks it can get away with it. And Hamas thinks that it can get away with it because Hamas is convinced that it will win this war.

Hamas’s goal of opening Gaza to the world has nothing to do with helping the people of Gaza. Hamas wants open borders so that it can import arms and the means to rebuild its tunnels. It wants to open the borders so that it can replenish its coffers.

In other words, Hamas’s purpose in fighting this war is to ensure that Hamas can keep fighting.

From a financial perspective, it isn’t simply that Hamas is expecting to receive cash payments from Qatar, Turkey, Iran and the Palestinian Authority. Hamas runs Gaza. Hamas is the tax authority.

As Dr. Moshe Elad explained to Globes, Hamas siphons money off every dollar in aid transferred to Gaza because it controls all the aid pipelines. Every dollar of international humanitarian aid to UNWRA and every other organization goes through that pipeline and part of the funds are transferred to Hamas.

The reason that Hamas is certain that when the war ends, it will achieve its goal of opening Gaza’s borders is simple. The United States says so.

The official position of the US government is that a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas will involve opening Hamas’s borders to the world. This position was spelled out by Secretary of State John Kerry in the draft cease fire that he sent to Israel last Friday.

Kerry’s draft said that a permanent cease fire agreement must include, “arrangements to secure the opening of the crossings, allow the entry of goods and people and… transfer funds to Gaza for the payment of salaries for public employees…”

After 2nd Lt. Hadar Goldin was captured, Secretary of State John Kerry called the Qatari and Turkish foreign ministers to ask them to get Hamas to release him. Kerry’s move demonstrated that the US continues to view Hamas’s chief state sponsors as the most attractive allies in achieving a sustainable ceasefire. As Hamas’s sponsors, Qatar and Turkey insist that Hamas’s demand for open borders be met.

Under these circumstances, Hamas has no reason to stop fighting.

The first option is for Israel to retake control over Gaza. The aim of the operation would be to decimate Hamas physically.

Such an operation will be prolonged. It will result in the deaths of thousands of Gazan civilians, hostages as they are, to Hamas.

It will result as well in massive losses of IDF soldiers.

In short, it will be a very painful, heartbreaking process. But it will make it impossible for Hamas to enjoy open borders and so continue fighting.

The other option is for the US to credibly reverse its position and oppose any opening of Gaza’s borders for as long as Hamas remains in charge. For this to work, it is not sufficient for the Obama administration to retract its current position and publically oppose the opening of Gaza’s borders. Given the administration’s track record, Hamas’s leadership won’t believe that the policy reversal is real.

Strong Congressional action is also required.

The relevant committees in both houses must begin serious examinations of all manner of US funding to the Palestinians and how this money serves Hamas. Such an investigation should focus on UNWRA.

During this war – and in previous Hamas campaigns against Israel – we have seen Hamas use UNWRA schools as missile storage sites and missile launching pads. This week three soldiers were killed trying to seal a tunnel whose entry shaft was located in an UNWRA clinic booby trapped with over a ton of explosives built into one of the walls.

At a minimum, this tells us that UNWRA is subservient to Hamas. All UNWRA installations and personnel are controlled by Hamas. As a result, UNWRA is a subsidiary – willing or unwilling – of Hamas and all funds to UNWRA must be suspended until Hamas is no longer in control of Gaza.

Again, the central point is that for as long as Hamas exercises control over Gaza, everyone in Gaza and every entity operating in Gaza is controlled by Hamas. All assistance to Gaza assists Hamas and communicates the message that Hamas will win the war.

As a result, the only way for anyone to help the people of Gaza is to free them from Hamas. And the only way to free them from Hamas is to defeat Hamas.

Rather than support Israel’s efforts, the Obama administration has adopted Hamas’s language and refers to the blockade as “a siege,” intimating that there is something illegal about it.

It would be reasonable for the Armed Services Committees of both houses to pass resolutions calling for the US Navy to assist Israel in maintaining the blockade. They can also bring the commanders of the US Navy before them to testify regarding how the US is or can assist Israel in sustaining the blockade.

Such moves would symbolically communicate US commitment to keeping Gaza’s borders sealed. Certainly they would communicate to Turkey that its intention to take action to break Israel’s blockade is strenuously opposed by the US Congress.

And this brings us to another key move that Congress can make. Given the active support Turkey and Qatar are providing to Hamas in its terrorist war against Israel, it is imperative that Congress begin questioning nature of the Turkish and Qatari regimes and the legality of US military and other strategic ties with these two state sponsors of Hamas and al Qaeda.

In the case of Qatar, a good place to start is for members of both houses to follow the lead of House Chief Deputy Whip Rep. Peter Roskam who sent a letter to Kerry and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew Thursday questioning US diplomatic ties with Qatar in light of its massive financial support for Hamas and its facilitation of the funding of al Qaeda affiliates ISIS and the al Nusra Front.

Members of the Senate Armed Services committee can exercise oversight and state their intention to cancel through legislation the $11 billion dollar arms deal with Qatar that the Pentagon announced last week. In light of what the US now knows about Qatar’s central role as the banker and bankroller of Hamas and other Islamist terror groups, continued military sales to Qatar may well be prohibited under the Arms Export Control Act.

As for Turkey, under the dictatorial regime of Turkey’s Islamist Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, NATO member Turkey has joined Qatar, Iran and Syria as a massive state sponsor of terrorism. It funds and provides other material support for Hamas. It is a major funder of al Nusra and ISIS.

To date, Turkey has largely avoided Congressional scrutiny for its support for terrorism. As a member of NATO its forces continue to train with US forces and Turkey is contracted to receive a hundred F-35 warplanes from the US over the next several years.

With Turkey actively involved in Hamas’s war against Israel, the time has come for Turkey’s support for terrorism to be scrutinized, with an eye towards designating Turkey as a state sponsor of terrorism, or at a minimum, demoting its position in NATO. Relevant committees in both houses of Congress should hold formal hearings about Turkey’s support for terrorism.

In order to minimize suffering of the people of Israel and Gaza, and to ensure Israel’s national security and US national security interests in the Middle East, the US must join Israel in its goal of defeating Hamas. To that end, both the administration and the Congress must openly and credibly join Israel in rejecting any cease fire arrangement that provides for the opening of Gaza’s physical and financial borders so long as Hamas remains in control of the area.

Read more here.

A rancid cocktail of hate and envy

Roger L. Simon explains how Israel alone is defending the West. He then concludes:

The hypocritical moralizing of the Obama-Kerry-Ban-Ki-Moons is about to go into overdrive as they will increasingly accuse the Israelis of over-reacting and harming too many civilians. Their media Greek chorus will scream out the death count at the top of their lungs , even though the numbers are puny compared to what is happening in Iraq and Syria or even, often enough, on a weekend in Chicago.

They will also all ignore, already having done so in an absolutely disrespectful manner, that the Israeli army does more to avoid civilian casualties than all the armies in the history of the world squared. I find Obama and Kerry’s pontification about this matter particularly nauseating, considering the American record on civilian deaths via drone attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen is significantly worse than the Israeli.

But most of all, now is the time to get behind the Israeli government and troops with our support. We need them to finish the job, to keep going until not a single Hamas tunnel is left. That will send a message that will resonate throughout the world. And remember — #DefundHamas.

Please read more here.

Winning wars, losing peace

One of Bill's best, in my opinion:

Soon Monsieur Obama is going to come.

From Roger L. Simon at PJ Media, a scene from The Theater of the Absurd:

Black stage. Lights fade up on two bums — John and Hillary — sitting by a campfire, looking depressed. Their once-fancy tattered clothes indicate that they have seen better days. A light flickers on the horizon.

HILLARY (brightening and pointing): Look, John!

JOHN (disinterested): What?

HILLARY: Explosions!

JOHN: So?

HILLARY: Mosul is on fire!

JOHN: Mosul?

HILLARY (laughs and hits him with her hat): The second biggest city in Iraq, you silly.

JOHN: Oh. (suddenly alarmed) Genghis Khan is back?

HILLARY: Noooo…. It’s al Qaeda. They’re taking over!

John stares at her, incredulous. Finally….

JOHN (totally dismissive): Nah… Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive.

For a moment, both look reassured. But there are more explosions and they become a bit apprehensive again.

HILLARY (convincing herself): Soon Monsieur Obama is going to come.

JOHN (nodding): Yes, he will come.

HILLARY: Everything will be okay.

They sit there.

JOHN (frowns): What if it’s not?

More explosions.

HILLARY (alarmed): Oops. There goes Tikrit!

JOHN: Tikrit?

HILLARY: Al Qaeda took that too…. Dumkopf!

Hillary starts beating him over the head with her hat again.

JOHN (shielding himself): Okay, okay… another city. Iraq has a lot of cities.

She relents.

HILLARY: Soon Monsieur Obama will come.

No one believes it.

JOHN (plaintively): What if he doesn’t?

Immobilized, the two bums continue to sit there. They look increasingly nervous, almost terrified, as the firelight dominates the stage. Then, suddenly, an idea dawns on them.

HILLARY & JOHN (simultaneously): The video!

HILLARY (jumping up excited): Yes, the video!

JOHN (jumps up too): It will solve everything!

The two bums lock arms and start to dance a jig as lights fade.

Please read more here.

Kerry says Israel could become an apartheid state

Josh Rogin writes that

The secretary of state said that if Israel doesn’t make peace soon, it could become ‘an apartheid state,’ like the old South Africa. Jewish leaders are fuming over the comparison.

It wasn't the only controversial comment on the Middle East that Kerry made during his remarks to the Trilateral Commission, a recording of which was obtained by The Daily Beast. Kerry also repeated his warning that a failure of Middle East peace talks could lead to a resumption of Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens. He suggested that a change in either the Israeli or Palestinian leadership could make achieving a peace deal more feasible. He lashed out against Israeli settlement-building. And Kerry said that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders share the blame for the current impasse in the talks.

According to the 1998 Rome Statute, the “crime of apartheid” is defined as “inhumane acts… committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.” The term is most often used in reference to the system of racial segregation and oppression that governed South Africa from 1948 until 1994.

Read more here.

Ted Cruz says Kerry should offer his resignation, and President Obama should accept it.

How do you squander $6 billion dollars?

The Fiscal Times reports, "The State Department has no idea what happened to $6 billion used to pay its contractors." Breitbart reports,

In a "management alert" released publicly April 3rd, State Department Inspector General (IG) Steve Linick said that the "lack of internal control at the department" has led to the loss of $6 billion in the last six years.

The last six years. Let's see now, who was Secretary of State during those years? Oh yeah, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry.

The New War on Terror . . . Or is that Terra?

Guest post
by
Suzann Darnall

In the Earth's approximately 5.5 billion year life span, it has undergone numerous climate changes. Just around 1,000 years ago we were in the midst of our warmest modern worldwide climate cycle. This was followed by a little ice age that lasted from about 1550 until 1850. I am pretty sure neither of these climate changes was caused by mankind. I think it was just the cyclic changes our planet goes through due to the nature of weather patterns. Yes, that's right; I am going to blame it on mother. Mother Nature!

But, according to John Kerry, the climate change we are supposedly experiencing is on the disaster scale of a weapon of mass destruction or an act of terror. So, now that Osama Bin Laden is dead ... are we going after Mother Nature?

He compared disbelievers of climate change (the new name they gave to global warming) to the Flat Earthers of bygone centuries. I found it kind of amusing, that in the midst of an extremely cold winter, when communities are still trying to dig out from being buried under record snowfall, he suggested those who refuse to believe in climate change are burying their heads in the sand. I personally think the thing we are mostly being buried in is the horse manure they keep shoveling out of Washington, DC as science . . . when they aren't using said shovels to pile on more of the BS they call "hope and change"!

See, we actually misjudged Obama about his claims of shovel-ready projects. There are plenty of shovel-ready projects. It is just that the only thing being shoveled is more of their Progressive, Liberal, Leftist, Democrat crap!

But, back to Secretary of State John Kerry and his wise words on climate change. It might be a good thing he is out amidst the college kids just talking about global warming. Since all of his foreign policy initiatives are failing, he might as well sit around and talk about the weather. Although, with liberals that might still be a taboo topic since it oft times is both their religion and their politics!

For one thing, unlike so much of what comes out of a liberal politician's mouth, when discussing climate change he will always be right! At least according to their rules of weather. Since high temperatures are a sign of global warming, low temperatures are a sign of global warming, and moderate temperatures are a sign of global warming . . . he can attribute any weather event to climate change.

See??? We do have climate change! Sometimes it is hot, sometimes cold, sometimes wet, and sometimes dry. Aha, Mother Nature is some kind of eco-terrorist, isn't she?

But, I don't think there is much we can do about Mother Nature and her ever changing seasons or always altering weather cycles. I think we need to face up to the reality that mankind is not always the most powerful force on the face of the earth. While we are capable of much we are also limited in some areas. I don't think we can anymore affect the worldwide weather patterns on a permanent basis than we can predict the weather with any real accuracy on a weekly basis.

I wouldn't mind the administration talking about the weather so much if it were not for the fact that they then try to take action to "improve" it . . . which usually means another EPA regulation that causes more jobs lost or another expansion of a bureaucracy that infringes on our freedom. If only they just talked about the weather amongst themselves and left the rest of us out of it!

John Kerry might think of climate change as the great destroyer, but I know for a fact that nothing is wreaking more havoc right now than the widespread stupidity and cupidity that is rampant in the policies and administration of Barack Obama! I think we will get through the winter of 2013-14 just fine. But, I am not so sure we can weather the storm of Obama and his minions.

An Obama ready and able to bypass the Constitution by using pen or phone to implement regulation and legislation at will is truly a weapon of mass destruction. The destruction of our traditional American way of life. He will sweep our rights and freedoms away like a force 5 tornado clearing a path of ruin through the heartland.

While I do not take John Kerry and his ideas about what constitutes a threat very seriously, I do take his boss' ability to fundamentally transform America as a very serious threat. If Conservative, Constitutional, TEA Party, Libertarian, Reagan Democrats, and other concerned Americans do not vote in a block to remove all Progressives from office in 2014 and 2016, we may face a disaster that will make Katrina look like wading through a puddle in a spring rain shower.

Do your research! Find the true Conservatives. Support them. Vote in the primaries. Help with campaigns. We might not be able to change the weather, but I know just as clearly we cannot weather the kind of change Obama and his cohorts want to bring about! So, let's do our part to bring back the kind of America we can be proud to pass on to our children. God bless America!

© Suzann C. Darnall, FEBRUARY 2014

Rudderless and reactive

Stuart Schneiderman has a post entitled, When You've Lost the AP. He quotes the AP's chief diplomatic correspondent, Matthew Lee:

there are growing fears that the U.S.'s Mideast policy has become rudderless and reactive, and may be contributing to worsening conditions and a rise of Islamic extremism, notably in Syria and Iraq.

Lee goes on to list Obama/Clinton/Kerry failures around the globe.

Very, very concerned

The page one news today is that there is "unrest" in Iraq, which means that Islamists are killing other Islamists. Don't worry, though, because John Kerry says his government is not just concerned, not just very concerned, but very, very concerned. Yes, it is true that his government left Iraq before the Iraqi army could be sufficiently trained to protect Iraq's citizens from terrorism, but nevertheless, Washington is very, very concerned.

Allen West writes in the Washington Times,

Imagine how painful it must be for those of us who served in Iraq, were wounded, and lost brothers and sisters there to see how those hard-won accomplishments are being lost. The missions we accomplished and the relationships we built are being decimated, unlike al-Qaida.

And, what about the effects of media bias? West again:

Consider this fact: 70 percent of all casualties in Afghanistan have occurred under President Obama, but we do not hear about that count like we did with President Bush and Iraq. Let me be clear, there are only two ways to end a combat operation: win or lose. Packing up and saying you are leaving only serves to embolden the enemy, regardless of how you try to spin it as “mission accomplished” or a political talking point.

Attempting to box in Israel

Mark Steyn writes about the American surrender to Iran in Geneva:

Many pundits reached for the obvious appeasement analogies, but Bret Stephens in the Wall Street Journal argued that Geneva is actually worse than Munich. In 1938, facing a German seizure of the Sudetenland, the French and British prime ministers were negotiating with Berlin from a position of profound military weakness: It’s easy to despise Chamberlain with the benefit of hindsight, less easy to give an honest answer as to what one would have done differently playing a weak hand across the table from Hitler 75 years ago. This time round, a superpower and its allies accounting for over 50 percent of the planet’s military spending was facing a militarily insignificant country with a ruined economy and no more than two to three months’ worth of hard currency — and they gave it everything it wanted.

Obama and Kerry have not only taken a U.S. bombing raid off the table, they’ve ensured that any such raid by Israel will now come at a much steeper price: It’s one thing to bomb a global pariah, quite another to bomb a semi-rehabilitated member of the international community in defiance of an agreement signed by the Big Five world powers. Indeed, a disinterested observer might easily conclude that the point of the plan seems to be to box in Israel rather than Iran.