REPORT: Obama Realizes That His Syria Strategy Is A Mess

[RiverLover]

REPORT: Obama Realizes That His Syria Strategy Is A Mess
11/13/2014

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama wants his advisers to review the administration's Syria policy after determining it may not be possible to defeat Islamic State militants without removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, CNN reported on Wednesday.

Citing senior U.S. officials, the network said Obama's national security team held four meetings in the past week that were driven by how the administration's Syria strategy fit into its campaign against Islamic State, which has seized large parts of Syria and Iraq.

"The president has asked us to look again at how this fits together," CNN quoted one senior official as saying. "The long-running Syria problem is now compounded by the reality that to genuinely defeat ISIL, we need not only a defeat in Iraq but a defeat in Syria." ISIL is another acronym for Islamic State....
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-obama-seeks-review-of-syria-strategy-sees-assad-removal-as-necessary-cnn-2014-11

But wait, there's more...

Syria Says U.S.-led Strikes Have Not Weakened Islamic State
11/28/2014

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Syria's foreign minister said U.S.-led air strikes had failed to weaken Islamic State it in Syria and the jihadist group would not be tackled unless Turkey was forced to tighten border controls.

A U.S.-led alliance started attacking Islamic State targets in Syria in September as part of a wider effort to destroy the al Qaeda offshoot that has seized large areas of the country and neighboring Iraq.

"All the indications say that (Islamic State) today, after two months of coalition air strikes, is not weaker," Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said in an interview with the Beirut-based Al Mayadeen TV broadcast on Friday.

The Syrian government has said it was willing to join the fight against Islamic State, but the United States refuses to deal with President Bashar al-Assad, who it says has lost legitimacy and must leave power.
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-syria-says-us-led-strikes-have-not-weakened-islamic-state-2014-11

But we can be PROUD the Progressive(real) Democrats in the senate refused to back our newest middle east clusterf*ck that's already cost $1 billion...

Sept 2014...Because the training program was part of a larger spending bill keeping the government funded until Dec. 11, lawmakers pointed to different pieces of the legislation to explain their dissents. Still, some broad themes emerged among the opponents:

1. Liberals reluctant to get dragged into another potentially long war

This group of Democrats, including Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren, both of Massachusetts, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, plus Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, among others, said they are hesitant to get involved in another Middle East conflict and question the wisdom of arming pro-Western Syrian rebels.

“I worry about the slippery slope we may be starting down in the thick of a sectarian civil war,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) said on the Senate floor Thursday. “ I am not prepared…. to endorse a policy that will involve spending hundreds of millions and almost certainly billions of dollars over multiple years to train and arm Syrian fighters who may or may not share our goals or values.”...
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/09/19/aid-to-syrian-rebels-the-senate-vote-breakdown/

They at least tried to stop it. We just need more like them in Congress!!

[Fred Sanders]

1. CNN reports more shit they pull out of their con constricted colons.

Quoting unnamed senior officials...meaning we just made it up mainly...slow political news times..got to keep up the Obama bashing to keep the pay check.

[RiverLover]

3. "The Hill" reported the same thing, along with many others I'm sure.

That's what happens when reporting actual events~

,,,After the vote, she(Elizabeth Warren) expressed concern that U.S. weapons could fall into the hands of radical Islamic militants.

“Even if we could guarantee that our support goes to the right people, I remain unconvinced that training and equipping these forces will be effective in pushing back ISIS,” she said.

Last year, she issued a statement opposing calls to arm Syrian rebels who are seen as more moderate than extreme groups such as ISIS.

“We need clear goals and a plan to achieve them or else the United States could get bogged down in another war in the Middle East,” she said, according to The Boston Globe.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who voted with Warren, said greater U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war would do little to degrade and destroy ISIS.

“The moderate Syrian rebels have shown a disturbing willingness to join forces with Islamic extremists like the Al Nusra Front, a wing of Al Qaeda, and it will be nearly impossible to stop the rebels we train from joining forces with groups that pose a real threat to the United States,” he said in a statement explaining his vote.

Murphy said the moderate rebels would be likely to turn against ISIS because they share the goal of deposing Assad.

Other Democrats have warned Obama’s request to back Syrian rebels could lead down a slippery slope to a broader military engagement.

“In regards to Syria, I have serious doubt about authorizing military operation. I think we need to have further clarification from the administration as to the ... objectives that they are accomplishing in Syria, and we have to be very careful about the authorization of the use of our military in a country where we are not invited,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who ultimately voted for the legislation.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/218268-warren-votes-no-on-syrian-motion

[Fred Sanders]

12. Obama being unable to single handedly solve Syria you see as a failure..you sure you are on the

right site?
Some forget the success of removal of chemical weapons as a triumph, some choose to forget, although they are mostly wingnuts.

Ps Reuters is not a " source".

[Comrade Grumpy]

15. The "good rebels" we want to use are in alliance with the local Al Qaeda affiliate.

On edit: Sorry, Fred, not directed at you. I just posted this in the wrong place.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014953992

"Notably, in the south, the rebels are working together with fighters from al-Qaida's Syria branch, whose battle-hardened militants have helped them gain the momentum against government forces. The cooperation points to the difficulty in American efforts to build up 'moderate' factions while isolating militants."

Going down this path is madness.

[RiverLover]

17. Oh jeez. Madness is right. We'd have to side with al-Qaida to take out Assad?

Thanks for info Comrade Grumpy (love your name!!)

[RiverLover]

18. Whoops. Looks like we already ARE working with Al-Qaida.

11/28/14
Syria: US-backed rebels advance in south, with Al Qaeda's help

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2014/1128/Syria-US-backed-rebels-advance-in-south-with-Al-Qaeda-s-help

There aren't words.

EDIT: I realize my ignorance is showing. I've got alot to learn here.

[RiverLover]

5. Unnamed senior officials was reuters. Do you say that about them as well?

Anyone who could imply the president has messed up royally here?

Do you think -maybe- that's why Hagel is gone??

[UTUSN]

2. How, exactly, does one/anyone deal with the mess that is Syria?!1 Answers/remedies welcome!1 n/t

[RiverLover]

6. Seiously, good Q. Would love to know that myself.

As would the president it would seem.

[delrem]

7. Aren't we all "Friends of Syria (tm)"? nt

[bhikkhu]

8. At this point, I don't know

My own ideal is peace, but how do you restore peace to a nation embroiled in a civil war, especially where isis and so forth are heavily involved and spill across more than one border? Its a mess, and a tragedy for a once peaceful country. Military strategy would say you apply overwhelming force to one side or the other, end the war quickly, and proceed to rebuilding. But there isn't really a side that I know of capable of leading any kind of peace to follow. Nation-building and heavy oversight would then be required, and I don't know that anyone has the stomach (or the budget) for that these days. I think if there was a good road forward Obama would be on it, but I don't know what that would be. I don't blame him or anyone for it.

[JDPriestly]

10. First, our government should own up to us and tell us the truth about all and any efforts

we have made to end the Assad regime or arm any group of rebels or any other role we have played there or any other connection we have to anyone involved in the conflict.

Then we need to decide what our goal is. Stop ISIS and depose Assad? Just get rid of Assad? Or just stop ISIS?

Then once we are clear about our goal we need to review all the involvement we have thus far, see what worked, what did not work and do more of what worked well.

We should not support any group that might possibly aid or comfort ISIS merely because it is anti-Assad.

[RiverLover]

13. Wow. Can you be our next Secretary of Defense?

You just nailed the very root of the dilemma. And why its pretty much impossible to "win" this one. But your insightful prioritization is spot on! Uncle Sam wants YOU!!

[delrem]

21. Good luck on anyone in the US, least of all the gov't,

owning up to what it's doing in the ME.

Not going to happen.

[Comrade Grumpy]

16. 1. Work for localized cease fires.

That's what happened in Homs. The rebels left, and the Syrian army let them. Truce time. This is a process supported by the UN. The first order of business ought to be to stop the killing, not to inflame it.

2. Building on local truces, start building a political process for negotiating a more inclusive Syrian government--without demanding that Assad leave, because that isn't going to happen. Not without a whole lot more people dying.

3. Work with ALL actors who are willing and able to defeat ISIS. That means Baghdad and Tehran and Damascus, even if you have to do it sotto voce. Work with the Gulf Arabs and Turkey to the degree they are willing to be part of the solution, and not part of the problem.

[JonLP24]

25. By staying the f out

Seriously, after a century of meddling, the idea we'll get things right this time around is a bad idea.

If it is something like stopping the genocide of the Yazidis, Christrians, or anyone not a "real Muslim" they should probably get involved only to stop it but then you have Assad's human rights violations as well, but things also aren't well for people under oppressive regimes in other places such as Sudan.

[pampango]

34. "... it’s easy to throw up your hands and say that part of the world is a hell-hole ..."

... it’s easy to throw up your hands and say that part of the world is a hell-hole; they’ve always hated each other; they always will hate each other; it’s intractable; there’s nothing we can do," he explains. "When you start to see that intractable conflicts are not, that is, people can seemingly hate each other for a long time and then lay down their arms and not pick them up again, it kind of emboldens you to say, well, maybe we can do that again.”

http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-09-29/world-actually-becoming-more-peaceful-believe-it-or-not#comments

None of which means I have an answer to your question.

[SidDithers]

4. ...

Sid

[Brickbat]

29. You got a perfect "leave" from the jury.

0-7, no comments.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 28, 2014, 09:54 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[SidDithers]

30. Nice. Thanks for posting the results...

Sid

[Old and In the Way]

9. Like any President following Bush/Cheney could have created a smart

and coherent mid-East policy. Truely a shame B/C couldn't have stolen a 3rd election....no one would ever have voted for a Republican Executive for the next 50 years.

[jaysunb]

11. I don't believe this shit for second ! n/t

[Comrade Grumpy]

14. The headline was encouraging, but the text suggests Obama wants to go further down the wrong path.

It should not be our policy to try to overthrow Assad. First off, it's not our right nor our business.

Second, then what? Seriously. What comes after Damascus falls? Are they out of their freaking minds?

[delrem]

22. Nevertheless that is in fact US policy, and has been for some time.

In fact, that's the fucking *cause* of the problem.

[Comrade Grumpy]

33. It is the height of folly. With a nice touch of imperial hubris. Please, Obama, reverse course.

Don't get in deeper.

[MisterP]

19. nu-uh, it's going great, just like Libya! (where ever did the DUers who said Libya was going great

and that only RT propaganda was making it look bad go?)

[woo me with science]

20. Two countries left on the PNAC list: Syria and Iran.

They tried over a year ago. Of course Syria has been the goal all along.

Syria: The next step in the PNAC playbook, remember?

Refresher Course in PNAC: This was planned a long time ago.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025518146

Only two countries remain on the PNAC agenda: Syria and Iran ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023540654

Neocons and neolibs sure have a lot in common. So much in common that they almost seem like the very same people:

When the DLC connections to the Koch Bros. became well known, they just rebranded the infiltration
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4165556

When you hear "Third Way", think INVESTMENT BANKERS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127432

GOP Donors and K Street Fuel Third Way’s Advice for the Democratic Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101680116

The Rightwing Koch Brothers fund the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481121

[ucrdem]

24. Here's your Third Way:

Glad you reject their losing strategy.

[ucrdem]

23. NOV. 13, 2014 was a week before Hagel left.

I strongly suspect this is why Hagel left, i.e., this was Hagel's complaint, which he happened to share with Senator McCain, who happened to blab it everywhere including, I also suspect, this reporter.

Obama is the only thing stopping the neocons, banksters, KBR boys and the rest from giving Assad the Ghadafi treatment and bombing Iran into glass. That's been clear for years to anyone paying attention. It's what he was elected to do, and so far he's managed to keep the wolves at bay. Small thanks he's gotten here.


p.s. as for Senator Warren, here's what she had to say on Sept 3:

Warren: Destroying ISIS should be 'No. 1 priority'

"The terrorists have moved, and we have to move in response," she said, adding part of that "means we're going to have to change in fundamental ways how we monitor our citizens when they go abroad."

http://thehill.com/policy/international/216559-warren-destroying-isis-should-be-our-no-1-priority

[RiverLover]

28. Elizabeth Warren on her "No" vote~

But as the Post observes, the Congressional votes this week exposed a “deep rift among Democrats over waging war, with a large bloc of liberals staunchly opposed to the modest mission, fearing another long-term engagement in Iraq.”

Perhaps the most significant statement of opposition came from Senator Elizabeth Warren, who voted No:

“I do not want America to be dragged into another ground war in the Middle East, and it is time for those nations in the region that are most immediately affected by the rise of ISIS to step up and play a leading role in this fight.”

Warren also grounded her opposition in doubt that training the rebels “adequately advances our interests.” In short, Warren placed herself squarely on the side of the debate that would circumscribe the appropriate goals of using American force even more tightly than Obama would, and is deeply wary that this action could lead to another long-term quagmire in the Middle East — which reflects deep skepticism about the president’s vow to the contrary.

This could boost Warren’s credibility as the standard bearer of the party’s liberal wing. I’m not a close watcher of Warren, so I don’t know what this means in terms of her thinking or long term positioning. But it bears keeping an eye on for clues as to how deep antiwar sentiment runs — or could run — among Democratic voters and liberal activists.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/09/19/morning-plum-elizabeth-warren-bets-against-war/

[woo me with science]

26. kick

[newfie11]

27. We invaded Syria for one reason, oil

and to get that oil we must get rid of Assaud.
It's all about oil!
7 countries in 5 years

[NightWatcher]

31. We're not losing troops in Syria....Policy Win

I think that every conflict we can stay out of, or at least keep our troops from spilling blood on their ground is a huge win for us.

[RiverLover]

32. Unfortunately, I don't think that will last, the airstrikes are failing.

We'll see. McCain is pushing for them to go. But ground troops would fail as well, so I hope they don't send our guys into this crazy quagmire.

[jwirr]

35. How could it not be? ISIS was using the threat to the US as a recruiting tool from the first and it

works. The beheadings called the loyal and our entry into the war again increased the flow. On the other side are the conservatives, the MIC and congress demanding that he do something.

It's the devil and the deep blue sea.

[G_j]

36. US air strikes in Syria driving anti-Assad groups to support Isis

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/23/us-air-strikes-syra-driving-anti-assad-groups-support-isis

Fighters from the Free Syrian Army and several Islamic military groups say Isis is gaining allies or truces due to US bombings

US air strikes in Syria are encouraging anti-regime fighters to forge alliances with or even defect to the fundamentalist jihadi group Islamic State (Isis), according to a series of interviews conducted by the Guardian.

Fighters from the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and Islamic military groups are joining forces with Isis, which has gained control of swaths of Syria and Iraq and has beheaded six western hostages in the past few months.

Some brigades have transferred their allegiance to Isis, while others are forming tactical alliances or truces. Support among civilians also appears to be growing in some areas as a result of resentment over US-led military action.

“Isis now is like a magnet that attracts large numbers of Muslims,” said Abu Talha, who defected from the FSA a few months ago, and is now in negotiations with other fighters from Islamic groups such as the al-Nusra Front to follow suit.

Another fighter from a 600-strong dissident FSA brigade near Homs, Assam Murad, said: “There’s no way we would fight Isis after the US military campaign against them.”

..more..