The Two Major Problems With President Obama’s Syria Address

By: Ben Swann
136

President Barack Obama addressed the nation Tuesday night, explaining why the chemical attack in Syria matters and where the U.S. goes from here.


In his address the President talked about the images of Syrians writhing on the floor of a hospital and dying after what appears to be a chemical attack. The President said that when “dictators commit atrocities they count on the world to look away.”

Obama said that the evidence against Syrian President Bashar al Assad is clear as he made the claim that “Assad’s government gassed to death over 1,000 people including children.” “No one disputes that chemical weapons were used in Syria.” and went on to say “We know the Assad regime was responsible”.

The problem with President Obama’s address however is that while he made very definite statements about the chemical attack clearly happening at the hands of the Assad regime, he offered no evidence of that claim.

As we have reported, the American public has no interest in the U.S. intervening in Syria. Some polls indicate as many as 91% percent of Americans are against it. Reports indicate that Congress is leaning 10 to 1 against military action. The Obama administration has insisted that they have no choice but to get involved because of the use of chemical weapons.

Where the President needed to move public opinion was by offering evidence, not simply his word, but evidence that the Assad regime committed this atrocity. It is not enough for the President to state that because there is evidence of the use of sarin, that draws a direct line to Assad. We have also reported that Turkish security forces arrested members of al Nusra Front with 2kgs of sarin on May 31, 2013. Millions of Americans are aware that al Nusra is the Syrian wing of al Qaeda in Iraq and certainly is capable of carrying out this kind of chemical attack.

On that note, it is interesting that in the 15 minutes President Obama spent appealing to the American people he made mention of the name al Qaeda only once and did not directly address the fact that those forces are actively working to overthrow Assad.

The second major problem with the President’s appeal was that he made a promise that the public will almost definitely reject at face value.

“I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not authorize open ended action as we experienced in Iraq. I will not engage in a prolonged air campaign as we did in Libya,” promised the President.

Of course, this promise cannot be made when there are so many unknown variables. What if Assad retaliates and launches a larger chemical attack? What if Iran and Syria launch attacks against Israel? And the biggest question, what if U.S. strikes help to topple the Assad regime and these stockpiles of chemical weapons are exposed to “rebel” fighters including al Nusra Front? Would the U.S. not be compelled to send in ground troops to secure those weapons?

Tuesday, the President needed to convince the public that the moral obligation of the United States is to intervene against ruthless dictators. For too many Americans, that address has been given one too many times.


  • Wise

    Good job on adding nothing to the conversation, Ben. Not to mention you fail to discuss the ideological implications of his speech last night.

    • GaryTruth

      Do elaborate.

      • Patrick Donoahue

        Yes, please do elaborate “Wise”.

    • matt

      we’re waiting…

    • GizaDog

      gTroll in the house!

  • avaindiana

    Pearl
    Harbor was not an act of War by definition of currant leadership, it
    was Just a limited air strike with NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND…..

    • Talis

      while I’m sure statements like that sound AWESOME for a Facebook share comment, it’s a false statement. The outrage over pearl harbor is that it was an attack without notification. It was a sneak attack. it has NO BEARING on this issue. I’m kinda sick of seeing this silly ass comparison posted on everyone’s feed cause it SOUNDS good.

      • YouSaid

        Evidence exist, old news in fact, that suficient intelligence existed to point otherwise. US govmt knew and did nothing. The truth is, it is what rallied people into the war they would otherwise not be interested in pursuing, End of Eutopia. More $$$ for the war invested 1%.

  • Ron Zakay

    Only two problems? Ben there are other wars, civilian and otherwise, being conducted now to the death toll of thousands, this just does not compute. All of it.

    • Pat R

      He didn’t say “only 2 problems”. He said “the two major problems”. Please re-read that.

      • Ron Zakay

        Agreed. I am still thankful that bullet was dodged.

  • Jeff Campbell

    Also, Assad is not a dictator. A dictator by definition has absolute power. Though Assad has great power, he still answers to the People’s Council when decreeing law. The word “dictator” is being used to sway opinion, period. Assad is not a true dictator.

  • Thomas Jacobs

    Our govt uses white phosphorous and depleted uranium, we have no moral ground whatsoever to judge any other country for using chemical weapons. Our govt commits atrocities on a daily basis with these drone strikes, it is far past time that we cleaned house….

    Our President has been giving aid to the al Nusra Front who are declared terrorist’s and enemies of the US. Obama is guilty of treason and anyone who has helped him are also guilty.
    How about you address this Ben Swann?

    • Jack Johnson

      Actually, Ben has addressed this.

    • Jonathan Schreiber

      The use of depleted uranium bullets in Iraq in my opinion is one of the most under-reported, and unknown tragedies related to the harming of civilians in the Iraqi War. Hundreds of thousands of depleted uranium cased bullets have been fired there. The uranium casings for the bullets emit radiation and have not only been harming adults but also children and unborn children. A stunningly large percentage of kids are being born in the areas where the heaviest fighting and use of these bullets took place with horrible deformities and mutations known to be caused by exposure to radiation. I’m sure you knew this Mr, Jacobs, I’m only elaborating for those who do not know what the term “depleted uranium” is referring to because many people still have no idea that they were used let alone the effects they are still having well after the end of the conflict.

  • RC

    Let’s step back time and follow the crumb trail:
    1. It’s likely the Syrian rebels launched the chemical weapon to force Obama to follow up on his “red line” promise. International agencies are finding evidence contrary to what the US is touting.
    2. The Syrian rebels are comprised largely of al-Qaeda, a fact that already has been established.
    3. Al-Qaeda has been declared as an enemy against the US.
    4. Yet, it was the US govt that CREATED al-Qaeda.

    Based on the alleged evidence that exists, shouldn’t the international outrage be directed towards the US govt? Shouldn’t we be angry at our government for spawning the atrocity known as al-Qaeda? If they hadn’t created al-Qaeda, would this Syrian problem exist today?

  • Guest

    And how many innocent people in Pakistan have been killed by the US government through drone terrorism…….(As of 28 July 2013)YearNumber of
    AttacksCasualtiesMilitantsCiviliansUnknownTotal2004123272005356415200621930942007405112632008362223472982009543387925492010122378845849201173195203551720124832683330620131731070111Total3604124462702,809

  • RC

    Let’s step back in time and follow the crumb trail:
    1.
    It’s likely the Syrian rebels launched the chemical weapon to force
    Obama to follow up on his “red line” promise. International agencies are
    finding evidence contrary to what the US is touting.
    2. The Syrian rebels are comprised largely of al-Qaeda, a fact that already has been established.
    3. Al-Qaeda has been declared as an enemy against the US.
    4. Yet, it was the US govt that CREATED al-Qaeda.

    Based on the alleged evidence that exists, shouldn’t the
    international outrage be directed towards the US govt? Shouldn’t we be
    angry at our government for spawning the atrocity known as al-Qaeda? If
    they hadn’t created al-Qaeda, would this Syrian problem exist today?

    It frightens me that Obama is now wanting to “aide” our sworn enemy. But it makes perfect sense that the US govt is only helping their creation.

    • Ray

      Absolutely! And there are many in our government therefore that could justifiably tried for treason. It really is that serious.

  • Jake

    I think the biggest What If.
    What if Russia defends Syria and sinks all of our ships. They are More then capable. They can do it with near immunity from action from Europe, as they supply a large chunk of Europe with energy.

    • Tony Karma Wallace

      I doubt they would. Besides, I don’t think Russia has that capability to be honest. Our navy is pretty damn badass. But hey, stranger things have happened I suppose…

      • Maguido

        Those Russian missile cruisers, heavy cruisers and heavy battlecruisers are no joke, their radar/observation ships eliminate any advantage F-35s (primarily, first detection) have over SU-30s making them at the very least equals..

        Also, factor in that Chinese warships have been spotted entering the Suez Canal. They more than have the capability.

    • Guy Daley

      Here comes the What If game by Jake. Always fun to play. Lets try this one on for size. What if we withdrew from all intervention in the middle east, thereby not giving anybody any excuse to attack us? What if?

      Boy this game is fun. What if we closed all our bases all over the world and instead guarded our southern border to stop the invasion from Latin America? What if we stopped giving benefits to the illegals that come here and enforce the laws we have? Oh this really is a fun game.

      Everybody, lets play the “What if” game, by Milton Bradley.

  • Ladyjames123

    To tell ell you the truth, I had a hard time getting past the smirking and eyes looking off camera. Had to turn off the picture to be able to listen.

  • Patrick McIntyre

    9th of December 2012 CCN reports that the US has contractors training the Syrian rebels on acquiring and the use of chemical weapons.

  • Ben

    Tuesday, the President needed to convince the public that the moral obligation of the United States is to intervene against ruthless dictators. can we start with Obama ???

  • leslie green

    Was he convincing?….NOT!!! He is so delusional to think that we are so stupid as to buy his lies and rhetoric again. “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”. (I didn’t vote for him the 2nd time either)

  • Nicole

    Since all you people think you know it all..what needs to be done? Can you people guarantee Assad had no part in this chemical weapon attack?? No. Obama is right. We can’t just let chemical weapon attacks happen and just sit back and act as if nothing happened..!! Things get worse that way! An international LAW was broken!! Just like laws are broken here and there are consequences …there should also be for the person who launched these chemical weapons into a place with innocent people! Something needs to be done and the way I see it every nation should be wanting to do something about it!

    • Schmluss

      All laws have punishments. What is the punishment for breaking the UN chemical weapons ban? I am positive that it doesn’t say that they US bombs that country. I am pretty sure that the people responsible are put through a trial and if found guilty, they are hanged.

      • trukn2zero

        Nicole, clearly you are simply “consuming” main stream media, as you and 99% of this population have not been offered any means to question the perceptions heeped upon us by teachers, experts and the media. You simply chide anyone standing with information that may be counter to your “icons” position. You unconsciously allow scripted experts to make every and all connections for you and then like so many out here, you parrot what they say back to whomever doesn’t agree.
        There is a simple method to gain certainty in every day decision making. And the same principles apply to the more complex. You simply take in “all” the seemingly relevant data, “all” of it. Then you throw out the contradictory, and continue to process out the contradictions until you are left with the most relevant, factual, unemotional finding. The media clearly does not do that. They cannot be both factual and balanced, then deceptive, shapers of information. They are just handlers of information. It is always up to us using our senses first to determine what is real and what is not. All of our perception is being waged war against by the same people that profit from shaping that perception. We use computer virus protection, yet we don’t provide ourselves any kind of protection intellectually. What protection are you going to provide for yourself after learning how much money is being spent to deceive you? Yes, it is much easier to allow your thinking to be outsourced, done for you. Except, that is not real, just simply believed.

    • Waldetto

      I can’t guarantee that YOU didn’t do it! Therefore by your own logic we should attack you! International law has NOT been broken as Syria did not sign the treaty against chemical weapons! Launching an unprovoked attack against Syria would be the US breaking international law though! There have been well over 30 civil wars in the last 3 decades were hundreds of thousands of women and children were killed from the Congo, Rwanda, Sudan and many others! MILLIONS of people were killed and we did nothing, but now 1000 is worth risking WWIII? Where were your pleas then? You weren’t told to demand intervention there were you?

    • Ricky Ross

      Nicole, We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

      (P.S. – Turn off mainstream “news”, their programming is apparently working…your brain is liquifying!)

    • John Stamos

      Since you think you know it all, can you prove that Al Assad (FFS do you really have to butcher the man’s name like that?) is, with certainty, responsible?

      Factor in the following:
      - Turkish security forces have captured Al Nusrah fighters attempting to smuggle 2kg of sarin gas into Syria.

      - There is an increasing number of reports from the _rebel_ side that Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia has been providing Al Nusrah with chemical weapons.

      - It was Carla Del Ponte’s (of the UN) initiall assessment that there was no evidence implicating Bashar Al Assad, while an increasing amount of evidence suggests the opposition was behind at least TWO previous chemical weapon attacks.

      - It is a known fact that Al Nusrah is (to correct Ben) along with their takfiri friends in ISIS, the Iraqi branch of Al Qaeda – The same group the US destroyed Afghanistan to capture/kill – the same group responsible for the the cold-blooded murder of 3,000 American civilians 12 years ago to the day – operating in Syria.

      - It is well known that Al Nusrah does not hesitate to kill anyone, be it themselves, each other, women or children if it furthers their cause. They have claimed responsibility for at least 50 suicide bombings during this conflict, they have claimed responsibility for several massacres in the Latakia region (predominantly Shia, Alewie and Armenian populations).

      - ISIS itself posts videos of its mujahideens executing people by the roadsides for the simple “crime” of being Shia.

      - That loyalist forces would resort to chemical attacks defies all logic. For one they possess both air and ground superiority.

      - For two, since cutting off rebel supply lines some months back, the loyalist forces have turned the tides dramatically in their favour – even Homs had been liberated from rebel hands – the army has had opposition forces largely contained – either surrounded or on the run, only half of Haleb (Aleppo) remained openly contested. The desperation that would compel a chemical attack has never manifested on the loyalist side.

      - For three, with the whole world watching and the western powers practically begging for an excuse to jump in, it would be suicide and of not benefit for Al Assad to resort to chemical attacks. When in doubt, ask yourself ‘Qui Bono” and all should become clear.

      Lastly, the whole propaganda about al Assad being a ruthless dictator butchering his own people is a bold faced lie. This was NEVER a popular uprising. 70% of Syrians stand firmly behind their president with 20% undecided. Only 10% support the opposition, most of whose forces are made up of foreign mujahideens and jihadist and takfiri groups.

      Factor in the Obama administration’s counter-points:
      - Al Assad did it because we said so and he’s mean.
      - The terrorists are the good guys lol.

      The rest of the workd isn’t sitting back pretending nothing happened. Russia would not send dozens of warships to Tartus and Latakia if “nothing happened”. What the rest of the world is giving the UN the opportunity to determine, with certainty who was behind the chemical attacks before – not after – interjecting.

      The most pathetic part is that you decry an international law being broken – a strike on Syria is a complete violation of international law. You can’t pick and choose when it suits your motives.

      You speak of breaking american laws being broken having consequences? Your administration has been providing aid to enemies of the state. That’s high treason. Let me know when Kerry, McCain and Obama are hanging from the gallows for their crime.

      No one disputes that those responsible should be punished. The catch is nobody except those responsible actually knows who is responsible. You’re advocating punishing someone – and possibly letting Syria and its chemical stockpiles (kept as a counter-balance to Israeli nukes btw) fall into Jihadist takfiri hands, effectively levying a death sentence on the non Sunni population in its entirety – just for the sake of punishing someone without ever even knowing who the guilty party is.

      The world will do something about when it knows who is guilty. Until then, sit down and calm your blood lust.

      • Akira81

        I had no idea THE john stamos was so informed!

    • Luke Miturn

      As an Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran we need to leave this alone the only thing that comes to mind when it comes to this war if it happens is Vietnam! We need to just leave them alone Lexus right itself without us interfering in somebody else’s battles.

    • Akira81

      This has to be the most ignorant post i’ve read so far. lol. How did you even stumble across this website? PLEASE tell me what consequences follow when our government is breaking its OWN laws, much less international laws? That thermometer water must taste DELICIOUS huh?

  • Jewelie Dee

    He also made an emotional appeal to his “friends on the Left” to consider children writhing on the floor under a chemical attack. Children are suffering in horrific and grotesque ways all over the globe. Why is it that those other children do not attract the same appeal for intervention?

    • Schmluss

      Or the children that are killed by the drones that he orders to attack in Pakistan.

    • Waldetto

      Because they are being killed “humanely” with bullets, bombs, starvation, drone attacks, etc., It’s not that children are being killed that is the issue, it’s HOW they are being killed! Wouldn’t you much rather die from a bullet than from a poison gas?

  • kitkatt

    Nicole, except they didn’t break international law. The laws against chemical weapons are BETWEEN the countries that signed it, and don’t apply to WITHIN individual countries. How do you like Obomba’s drone strikes and killing of of children? How do you reconcile with that hypocrisy?

    If you want to fight a war, I’m all for you heading over to Syria, armchair warrior.

  • Terry

    What about the children writhing in pain from hateful parents or going without food in the United States? Obama always uses pictures of children to prove his point and it’s very distasteful. Also, how many innocent children would be killed as a result of his bombings?

    • trukn2zero

      using children is an old old appeal used effectively for millenia. It is an easy appeal to emotion, a red herring. Again, its as old as history. Educate yourselves in the use of fallacies, they are specifically used to avoid the real issue and create a “perceived” issue. And what else does the media do but fabricate nothing from nothing, yet they manufacture consent and shape opinions all the time.

  • Charles Walker

    Our leaders want the rest of us dead. They will go down in their nice bunkers.

    • Ricky Ross

      Let’s call them by their REAL titles…OUR ENEMIES!

  • Ricky Ross

    I wish I had a $100 bill every time he referenced “the children”!

    • Dave Jackson

      The children? Pfft … give me a break. This guy is the terrorist.

      • david

        Loons

    • p

      the children that he wants aborted in America, why no concern for those children Obama??

      • Ricky Ross

        Well, you know, a muslim hell bent on conquest will always care more about muslim children, then American children.

        With that said, using the children is always a best seller when the government needs to accomplish or fund something.

  • ax123man

    The problem with where this argument is going is that, even if Obama doesn’t get his war now, they are still winning the battle. Unless the U.S. establishes a reasonable, transparent and coherent set of standards by which intervention is established, this is all a moot point. The “chemical” cry is obviously a play on emotion. Do those who died of non-chemical weapons not matter? Does it not matter that the U.S. has been complicit in it’s own chemical attacks? Is there that much difference between the Syrian children dying of chemicals and Pakistani children dying of U.S. drones? Does it not matter that similar atrocities are going on in other parts of the world that the U.S. all but ignores?

    Why can’t leaders apply a consistent set of principals in these cases? The answer is obvious. The real reasons for making the case for Syrian intervention have nothing to do with chemicals or human atrocities.

    Isn’t about time we hold these fools to higher standards? If we don’t do that, we are falling into a trap, set by our own Government.

  • n10dkf

    What about the children drone bombed by the fascist obama regime. His practice of claiming to have moral standards, to which his own behavior does not conform, is sickening.

  • BEETLEJUICE

    If Obama wants to go to war I hope he will be there on the front line!!

  • Kevin Merck

    No country on the face of this earth has used more chemical weapons on their enemies, their own people, and their own troops, than the USA.

    Just ask any Viet Nam vet.

    What do you think the fluoride in your drinking water is all about?

    We are also the only country to ever use nukes.

    Obama and most of the people on Capital Hill need to be arrested and jailed.

  • Hypocrisy Is Cool

    Anyone who takes anything this proven liar says as truth needs to have his/her head either examined or removed from other dark parts of his/her body. This is just an ongoing distraction to give the media something else to cover and distract the sheeple from his BIG 5 scandals: Benghazi, NSA, IRS, public spying, and Fast & Furious gun running to Mexico, which now congress has conveniently stopped investigating. Are you buying it? If so, say BAA-BAA-BAA and get ready to be sheared.

  • zeestan

    the chemical reason is just to justify the hatred and stupidity of the neocompoops. They will scarf at facts and call you names. but will clutch onto any lie that justify’s Israel and their pathetic view of a world that dosnt deserve to be here because THEY want Jesus to come back. I say the earth is for the living…….Leave us alone with your hate, racisim, and religious stupidity

    • boom

      So they like to keep their necks warm at facts, eh?

      • zeestan

        i rest my case

  • leslymill

    When you quoted Obama as saying..Syrians writhing on the floor of a hospital , He actually used the words “COLD floor” because it directly reminded my of the Kuwait lady before Congress crying and sniffling about the incubator babies being pulled out onto the cold floor to die …lie that led to Desert Storm fame.

    • Dawn

      Yep, it just adds to drama to illicit the basest of emotions. …as if that part of the world, where 100 + degree temps are normal, even has COLD floors.

  • zeestan

    yeah one of oilbombers daughters is almost of age lets see how close she makes it to removing those supposed chemical weapons

  • Dawn

    Why are they even still pushing for war? Assad agreed to the deal Putin proposed. Even he had used the weapons (which I don’t buy at all), he won’t be able to in the future. The supposed “problem” has been solved.

    Glad at least one dictator has some sense of reason… You know the US screwed when Putin was able to diplomatically prevent war for us, while Obama & his neocons spread fear of nuclear doom.

  • jac

    If there ever was a lose-lose situation this is it. With Putin and Iran siding with the Al Assad regime, and the US, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States siding w/ the Rebels and Al Qeda against Al Assad, neither scenario paints a desirable outcome.

    Russia via Putin is dictating to the US President how things are going to be, and our president is listening and seems to be willing to go along. What will happen if he does, is Russia, together with Iran, will control the Middle East in what will be the largest geopolitical coup since WW II.

    The alternative, if there ever really was one, is to have DECISIVE US military intervention to overthrow the Al Assad regime, and thus check Russian and Iranian power, which of course would lead to a long, drawn out and ugly war by proxy in Syria, with radical Sunni elements poised to take over–another undesirable outcome.

    If Russia’s proposal goes through, Shia Iran, with Russia behind it, could very well become the next great super power to challenge the US, similar to how the Soviet Union did in the Cold War. And this might just be the outcome the so-called international power elites wanted anyway, and Syria is providing a convenient way to bring it about.

  • The other Ben

    Ben, I’m a bit disappointed that you don’t point out that the US has been using chemical weapons in many of its recent wars, Vietnam being a big one. Don’t go the way of “Campaign for Liberty” in being just another marginalized libertarian Republican mouthpiece. Do something people of all political persuasions– with two spare brain cells to rub together that actually THINK about these issues– can get behind.

    • Robert Zraick

      I am glad you mentioned that. We are complete hypocrites when it comes to Chemical weapons, or any other WMDs for that matter. We have more weapons than any other country on earth, including chemical weapons, biological weapons, radiological weapons, and nukes.

      We have used lots of chemical weapons since the world condemned them. White phosphorus, Saran gas, napalm, Agent Orange, depleted Uranium and not only are we the only country who have used nukes on human beings, we invented the atom bomb, and that wasn’t enough. We made the H-bomb which is 1000 time more powerful than the first a-bomb.

      At what point do we say that these other countries are so wrong, when they are doing less than we are.

      No matter where you stand on this, the rest of the world sees this hypocrisy, and we will have no friends when we start the next world war.

      We have not actually won a war since WWII. And we will not win WWIII.

      We will lose because we are fighting as the aggressors. We are the bad guys. We will be fighting on the wrong side.

      Even if we win we will lose.

  • robertsgt40

    The President said that when “dictators commit atrocities they count on the world to look away.”–He’s correct. Except this time they are looking squarely at him.

  • hp b

    Every time I see OBarnum’s image, I see a cobra.
    Sorry about that..

    • Justsomeguy151

      Why? He IS a snake.

  • hp b

    A cobra holding a big cream pie.

  • akatom3565

    I guess if using of gas is the trigger maybe if they gassed the four Americans in Benghazi instead of shooting them Obama and Hillary would have get a crap!

  • Akira81

    Is no one concerned about the real issue here? BEN AFFLECK is the new BATMAN!! Stop being distracted by these global elites spewing absurdities to distract us from the issue at hand. Ben Affleck. Batman.

  • RonWillison

    There is power in numbers. Look at what is taking place nationwide today. I say Putin and Assad are for real on this issue. I also say that Obama’s let himself be pushed into drawing the chemical line in the sand by Netanyahu and AIPAC back when BIBI was preaching to our congress and the world with his Wiley Coyoti bomb picture trying to justify attacking Iran over nukes. Remember that line in the sand?. NOTHING takes place on this planet that these people don’t have in their blueprints for world domination. NOTHING!.

  • Loki Luck III

    What would Zbigniew Brzezinski Say?

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    Some here talk about Putin. Putin can dictate terms here, because he has the BrahMos-II anti-ship missile. Wikipedia says mach 7. Wikipedia like most media is a generation or two behind. My understanding is that Russia has a missile exceeding mach 9. If the U.S. Navy has any counter-measure, then it exceeds mach 9/10 and we don’t know about it.

    You want to stabilize the ME? First, a Constitutional Congressional Declaration of War on the State of Israel. Don’t wait for NATO or the U.N. They will soon follow our lead with reserve troops. Assault Israel with USMC/SEALs and SF/Airborne troops. Pull all assets from all corners of the world. Arrest Bibbi and the Likud Party. Seize MOSSAD/Shin Bet and all materials. Turn over to NATO/UN, who will turn over to World Court. Russia/China will be most pleased here. Paradigm shift will ensue globally. Federal Reserve Bank will collapse overnight.

    Domino effect will ensue. Gas at the pump will soon be less than one dollar. Immediate tax cut. Employers will be encouraged to hire and train. New confidence will abound to streamline govt. Cut regulations. Reform tax code. Bring capital/investment back to CONUS. Solve immigration with immediate green card to all illegals. Mandatory English language law. Cannot produce competent English skills within one year, then immediate deportation. Etc, etc, etc.

    One issue here, is that MOSSAD materials will probably indict CIA/FBI and MI5/MI6 as co-conspirators. This will be a good thing in the long run. Plus, Roi Tov and Lee Wanta will finally be safe without constant bodyguard.

    Is Armageddon averted? Maybe…

    More to deal with here:

    [WARNING: For real truthseekers only]

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/09/secret-space-war-x-the-third-force-begins-its-take-down-of-mystery-babylon/

    • Steven

      A countermeasure doesn’t necessarily need to be faster than the weapon coming in. It just needs to stop the incoming weapon. Like flares on an aircraft.

      • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

        There is no known effective counter-measure to a hypersonic cruise missile, short of “star wars” tech. Comparing flares to AIM-9 or chaff to AIM-120 to hypersonic missiles is apples and oranges. Try again.

        • Steven

          Flares were an example of the fact that a countermeasure does not need to be faster than the incoming weapon, not a suggestion for defeating a cruise missile.

          Simply exceeding the speed of sound does not make a weapon impervious to countermeasures. It only reduces the time between launch and splash… and given that we’re talking about cruise missiles, that time is already significant since they’re a standoff weapon.

          A short list of IADS components that can be used, generally, against a cruise missile by a ship would be:

          1. Having interceptors on alert, or airborne, from the Aircraft Carrier that is almost certainly going to be there… and having them ready to intercept the weapon with their own anti-air systems (AMRAAM would be a good choice, thanks to it’s significant standoff; but you don’t normally escort a missile, so an AIM-9 would work just fine.)

          2. GPS Jamming — there are several assets that can do this, both airborne and on the ground (or ship). This, alone, will cause the INS to drift; not significantly for a short period of flight, but it’s worth mentioning.

          3. Fuse Jamming — mimicking the signal on a proximity fuse (if it’s using one) to cause an early detonation. Useless if the cruise missile is using impact or GPS fusing, but (again) worth mentioning.

          4. Just about any modern anti-aircraft artillery or missile system. Notably, the CRAM or the RIM-7. Modern AAA is capable of hitting targets… especially target that are moving in a constant direction at a constant speed (like Cruise Missiles)… rather effectively by shooting where they’re GOING to be, rather than where they ARE. Automation has removed the human error, and made this even better.

          Cruise Missiles are dangerous, yes; but they’re far from impervious to countermeasures. There ARE a few things on the market that we just don’t have anything to combat… but Cruise Missiles aren’t one of them. And just because it’s supersonic doesn’t mean that it’s magically going to defeat every single defensive tool in our arsenal.

        • Steven

          Further, the fastest cruise missile in existence — the Russian BrahMos — has a top speed of Mach 3.0… so you know. We don’t need to have weapons that travel at Mach 10 to take them out.

          We also have an *entire* class of NAVY ship specifically designed to kill incoming missiles, called “Missile Destroyers”, that are very good at what they do. There’s also 3-4 assigned to every carrier group.

    • English Law lol

      Let me see if I understand you correctly. You want a mandatory English language law put in place, but you don’t know how to to use correct punctuation. Also, you don’t know what defines a complete sentence. That seems rather fair that you would deport others for not having “competent English skills”, yet your English, as well as with the English of many other supposed “patriots” and “true Americans”, don’t understand basic English. Is this correct?

      • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

        BASIC English moron! Not English majors or English scholars.Nothing more I hate than a grammar Nazi, is a pedant. I don’t write for a living. I did not ask for your editorial critique. If I need an editor, then I will hire one. Maybe even you. Why don’t you go try your flame baiting with Veterans Today staff. Particularly with Jim W. Dean, Gordon Duff, and Dr. Preston James. See how long you last there. Freaking moron! I bet you got beat up a lot in school.

    • Justsomeguy151

      Yr crazy. Why start another war when all one has to do is have the stones to arrest this administration and the last 2 before Obumma, Bush jr and Clinton and most of all Bush sr. Arrest their accomplices, steal back all the blood money they have stolen on behalf of the Rothschilds/Rockefellers/Federal Reserve/NWO and rebuild America and the war torn countries these criminals have ravaged with their manufactured wars for profit. Arrest the Banksters/Wall St and the Federal Reserve. Most of our debt is imagined anyway, thru interest on fake money. America could fix itself tomorrow, if these criminals were exposed and deposed but they own all the TV networks and most of the printed press. —— Israel is not at fault, its their leaders, same as the US. They’re all puppets courtesy of the criminals I just listed. Wow what a nice pipe dream. America is dead, I wish this weren’t true but its all over but the shouting. The satanic govt is finally going to launch the last false flag, possibly a nuke like Sen Graham has been alluding too. They’re getting us ready for it. Then DHS will round up anyone who questions the official version of events and puts them in the FEMA camps. The world is ripe for the Antichrist to make his appearance on the world stage. These are scary times. God save America, even though we don’t deserve it.

  • David

    I think Doctors Without Borders is the source. read their p.r. to U.S. , U.K. and other internet “false” info. reporters. they confirmed 355 dead if I remember correct.

    • Matthew Powers

      355 was an early number, not sure if this would grow in the short term, but the John Kerry’s 1429 is clearly a ketchup stain on the current administration.

  • Mike

    How about the moral obligation of the United States to take care of it’s own people first. Quit getting into everyone’s problems and take care of our own.

  • Mos Deffo

    The US government have been covertly funding and arming the rebels since it all kicked off. They’ve also been planning this action since 2001. Please visit this blog post to see HOW the US government have been seeking regime change in Syria for years > http://guardianwarpropaganda.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/rewriting-the-entire-script/

  • alnga

    With the History of Published Numbers by the US Govt. you would think that most people would oppose starting a war that was agitated by our numbers. Our Govt. will lie to us about anything that would require our approval including getting votes and declaring war without a national interest.

  • Sierra Porter

    Ben needs to write more of the articles on this site!! I love the fact that he is so unbiased, and doesn’t ask a loaded question at the end of his articles!!!

    • Uppity Slave

      yep…should have been with the sub-heading “opinion”.

  • T-Ozzy Czernik

    WHEN DID WE OFFICIALLY become a constitutional democracy? I thought we are/WERE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC?!?!?!?Constitutional scholar huh?

  • James Taylor

    That’s been the Obama regimes’ problem with all of the “phony scandals” so far and it holds true now, they NEVER consider the consequences of the actions they take.

    • Farleyagain

      If only our representatives would enforce the legally available consequences!

  • Nazbol

    This man, this sub-human, is a warmongering imperialist scumbag, no different from jug-ears Bush. He’s basically a neo-con in browner skin. Read Lenin and Strasser, people, they predicted this hypocrisy.

    • onegoodnathan

      these criminals are also well outlined by Murray Rothbard.

  • smithpae

    False flags in US history: Fort Sumpter, check it out. “Remember the Maine.” The Lusitania, loaded with weapons with innocent civilians deliberately used by Wilson et. al. to “Make the world safe for democracy.” Pearl Harbor, deliberately set up, including firing the head of the Pacific Fleet two weeks before because he knew what was coming, Gulf of Tonkin, Weapons of mass destruction, now Sarin. “When will they ever learn, oh when will they every learn.’ (From, “Where have all the Flowers Gone.”

  • Lora rain

    He’s the Antichrist. Get ready for WW3

    • Farleyagain

      Both Russia and Iran have made it crystal clear that any attack on Syria will mean WWIII. So let’s don’t.

  • Maria

    I guess there is a treat signed after WWI regarding chemical weapons which requires an international ( UN?) investigation when they are used and international agreement on which measures to take. Hope the Congress doesn’t allow the executive to infringe international laws. If they do, shame on all of them.

  • onegoodnathan

    you’d have to be completely brain dead to believe a word out of this guy’s mouth.

  • Slim_Strontem

    Logic.
    If his brain processes are more organized than a 3 year-old’s, then he knows he is lying and has a purpose for doing so.
    If they are more organized than a 12 year-old’s, then such a big, obvious lie to such a big nation must be calculated with a big payoff–Such as, a Mu Bro caliphate and/or eradication of the Shia.

    • Farleyagain

      Ah, but ARE his brain processes developed above that of a 5 year old? They don’t seem to be from his “solutions” to anything he “puts his mind to.” His speeches, as well, are just cliche ridden pap. So no, I don’t think he’s old enough to engage in adult conversation. Isn’t that what we are learning whenever he meets with Bebe or Putin?

      • Slim_Strontem

        Is it kindness or dishonesty when we credit someone with stupidity?

    • Bee Judy

      Or, someone with Narcissistic personality disorder. They are pathological liars and believe what they are saying in the moment. They might realize later that it is all BS but then their shame brings out all their most trusted defense mechanisms and they believe their own BS all over again. This is a cycle with this guy; he has been fooling people his entire life with this nuttiness.

  • rickroland

    One more item of great concern: Obama the so-called, and self-called, “constitutional scholar”, during the speech called the U.S. the oldest “constitutional democracy”. If he was truly a constitutional scholar, and he’s not, he would know that the U.S. is a constitutional republic (not democracy), big difference, huge.

  • Bee Judy

    Seinfeld was the show about nothing. This was the speech about nothing….and considering the mess he is making both domestically and in foreign policy, his entire 8 years may turn out to be the presidency about nothing!

    • Robert Zraick

      I wish it were about nothing. Unfortunately it is about a President lying to the People of our country. I would say that is something.

      • Bee Judy

        And Boehner et al letting him get away with it Robert!

    • defyentropy

      Your statement appears truncated – the presidency about nothing of benefit to or protection of American citizens, or foreign peoples whom executive powers have targeted.

      • Bee Judy

        “nothing” – a non – no thing – a negative – there will be no positive legacy – it is all going down in flames from the non-recovery to the non-budget, to the non foreign policy, to the non health care, to the non relationship with Congress and the people.

        • defyentropy

          Well said, good post

  • FlipFlop

    also, the dumbass continues to incorrectly describe our form of government as a democracy. We’re a constitutional republic. Not a democracy. Not a constitutional democracy. You’d think a fuckn constitutional lawyer could remember that. It just bothers me that either he purposefully does it wrong for some reason, or he’s an idiot….we’ve had enough idiots in the white house.

  • adoracle

    those rustlers need to be rounded up and thrown under the jail till the sun turns blue.

  • Colin

    Can’t have it both ways fella’. “what if Assad retaliates with a larger chemical attack” does not sit alongside “there is no evidence that Assad gassed his people”.
    I imagine your article will be of much comfort to this revolting butcher. Why bother with a military that can strike anywhere if you won’t use it ?

    • DCox

      Colin, just curious if you’re in the military or if you’re one of these that likes to send other people to die for your “causes”

    • Camilo Barahona

      You know it is possible to have chemical weapons and still not use them. The FSA are the only people that have been caught using Sarin gas- the same people we’ve been arming this whole time!

      I find your logic disturbing – so quick to launch missiles into a country you have no clue about, just because we can.

  • Kevin

    The bigger problem is that Obama says we’re a Constitutional Democracy. No, Mr. Constitutional Law professor, the U.S. is a Constitutional Republic. If you don’t even know the political framework of the country you’re supposed to be “leading”, you might need to rethink what you’re doing . . . .

  • amanda

    It touches off a nerve with me that he called us a “Constitutional Democracy.” We are a “Constitutional Republic.” Looks like he does not have the ability to weigh any of the consequences of going to war….that is a trait of a sociopath. So is lying with a smirk on your face.

    • Fred28

      Amanda Just proves he’s not from America a fifth grade learns that in social studies!

  • cslagenhop

    How about impeaching him for conducting an illegal war in libya.

  • Holly

    I dedicate this post to our President, his speech writers and every other American who hasn’t a freakin’ clue!

    “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
    and to the Republic for which it stands,
    one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

    SUMMARY
    In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. “Republic” is the proper description of our government, not “democracy.” I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction.
    A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group.

    Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word "people" may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.]

    Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. [NOTE: In a pure democracy, 51% beats 49%. In other words, the minority has no rights. The minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority.]

    The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.
    The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to “liberty and justice for all.” Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. (see People’s rights vs Citizens’ rights)

    In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution’s first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.
    http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm

    • parrotail

      hope u dont mind ,I shared ur comment on fb thank you

  • usaok59

    Pretty neat how many have called out this slug for calling America a Constitutional Democracy instead of Republic! The people aren’t as dumb as he thinks they are (well some of us). Did anyone in the media call him on this? No.

    • jaxholley

      He was talking about kenya

  • anestat

    Obama is such a LIAR that we don’t believe anything he says. His speeches are carefully engineered to deceive the people.

    • mymydorothy

      Unfortunately many people listen to what he says on TV and simply just believe him and others.

  • http://mediaispropaganda.com/ sammscript
  • Crocodile

    The following is the MOST important comment and most revealing of this entire administration or regime IMO-“dictators commit atrocities they count on the world to look away.” In other words, the executive office of the United States commits atrocities they count on the American people and the world to look away”.

  • mymydorothy

    Obama contradicts his use of Drones in Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. killing hundreds of women and children each month.

  • Erik Kilpatrick

    Blunder after blunder… lie after another lie(Proven on Video)…….what we have here is loss of integrity….and a lack of confidence in his words….hard to recover from this..He now has to prove his every word is fact..

  • Farleyagain

    I must admit I am predisposed to believe the rebels or some other group (not Assad’s men) detonated the chemical attack because I heard 18 months ago that that was the plan to involve us in toppling Assad (a false flag event involving chemical weapons on civilians). An audio version of Assad’s head of the chemical weapons program can also be heard asking in a panicked and angry voice (paraphrased) following the attack: What is going on – who screwed up? The destruction of any form of order in Iraq, Libya, and Egypt by our intervention are more evidence that we should stay away. And lastly, the events in Benghazi last September 11th and the subsequent lies and cover-ups put this administration in the category of “not believable” and moving quickly toward “completely untrustworthy.” Those pieces of evidence plus the fact that our President lies every time he speaks to us have convinced me that the real goal is to remove Assad and open yet another country to al Qaeda’s vicious actions. So, no, I don’t believe Assad’s forces were involved and I don’t think at this point I can be convinced of it.

  • Smarter Than You

    I don’t believe President Obama ever wanted to send our military to bomb Syria, but he couldn’t just sit by and do nothing when it comes to a report that chemical weapons were used. Therefore he couldn’t continue as “business as usual” as if nothing was going on—he had to act.

    And he did. Going into this, he had to know Russia would be adamantly opposed to any kind of U.S. military strike in Syria. So by openly saying he would push for just that, it forced Russia to finally do something. Had he not made his intentions public, Russia most likely wouldn’t have offered the deal that’s currently on the table to remove all chemical weapons from Syria and put them under international control. Without a missile fired, bomb dropped or troop deployed, President Obama has managed to get a possible deal to remove chemical weapons from Syria. You Obama haters keep hating and watching Fox News.

    • starmanres

      Libs are always the perfect example of hypocrisy. If this were Bush or if Romney would have won, you would be screaming at the “war mongering Republicans”. The Media would be showing story after story of the innocents killed by U.S. Bombs. Where are Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Neil Young and Susan Sarandon? Where is the media filming Cindy Sheehan standing outside every place 0bama visits? The Silence from the Anti-War Left is deafening.

    • Element Omega

      Your first sentence is obviously incorrect and stupid. I had to stop reading there or vomit.

  • https://twitter.com/JordanDJohnson Jordan

    Ah yes, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient huh? Very deserving he is…

  • OUTLANDER1968

    Pepe Escobar on Pipeline Politics and what was really behind the U.S. wanting to bomb Syria?

    http://therealnews.com/t2/component/hwdvideoshare/viewvideo/76849