By: Thomas Madison
August 25, 2013
There is no question, seeing the video evidence, that a chemical agent was employed near Damascus a few days ago, specifically a nerve agent, likely Sarin, a powerfully toxic and fatal chemical, just a small dose of which can cause near immediate death. Anyone who sees the video evidence, and has attended a military chemical weapons training school will immediately recognize the symptoms of the victims as that of a nerve agent attack.
The Obama “regime” (hard to call it an administration at this point) is implicating Assad. Assad is pointing the finger at the rebels. An investigation is underway and there is a team of UN chemical weapons inspectors in-country to conduct the investigation.
To determine just who is responsible may not be easy, but a quick look at motive by anyone with at least a third grade education clearly eliminates Assad. First of all, what would Assad have to gain by employing chemical weapons against his own civilians, many of the victims being children? NOTHING! He does, however, have everything to lose, literally everything. Such an action by Assad would be suicidal and there is absolutely nothing for him to gain by it. The rebels, on the other hand, have everything to gain, especially if the media, and thus popular opinion, implicates Assad. Secondly, there are NO apparent rebel casualties, all innocent civilians, another point in favor of the perpetrators being the rebels. The rebels would certainly not kill their own soldiers, but they would sacrifice innocent men, women, and children in a heartbeat (Al Qaeda training 101). Thirdly, Assad is clearly winning this war. He has ABSOLUTELY no motive to do something this stupid!
With US warships, bristling with cruise missiles, within short striking distance, the situation is grave. WWIII may be about to start, or escalate, I suppose, if you are of the opinion that we are already in it. Has Congress been consulted in any way regarding US military intervention in Syria? If it has been, then that is surely a well-kept secret. However, today the White House said that it would “consult” with Congress before conducting a military strike in Syria. John Boehner has toted the administration’s water before. In July, he publicly endorsed the administration’s decision to provide military assistance to the rebels, and in June he spoke against allowing a vote on Syria military intervention. Reps. Chris Gibson, R-N.Y. and Peter Welch, D-Vt., had led an effort to force a vote on prohibiting military intervention in Syria, including aid to the rebels, without congressional authorization. Boehner blocked a vote on their measure in July. So, it appears that the administration will have a willing accomplice in the person of John Boehner, should Obama decide to conduct US military operations in Syria.
As to the legality of the Obama administration acting unilaterally in Syria, without Congressional approval, Congressman Justin Amash, R-Mich., said in a tweet Friday night:
“Congress hasn’t authorized war against Syria. Unless President Obama expects imminent attack on the U.S., use of force is unconstitutional & illegal.”
However, there is ample precedent in recent years of presidents acting without Congressional authorization, President Bill Clinton’s air war in Kosovo, and Obama’s strikes in Libya.
One thing is clear. Syria, and most of the Middle East, is an absolute mess, and we may soon find ourselves chin-deep in a very nasty situation we are already knee-deep into. Advice to Obama… STAY THE HELL OUT OF SYRIA!!!!
