Washington Post: Enough is enough — U.S. abdication on Syria must come to an end

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 18, 2016, 8:42:54 PM2/18/16

to

I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.

The Washington Post

Opinions

Enough is enough — U.S. abdication on Syria must come to an end

Michael Ignatieff is the Edward R. Murrow professor of practice at the
Harvard Kennedy School. Leon Wieseltier is the Isaiah Berlin Senior
Fellow in Culture and Policy at the Brookings Institution.

As Russian planes decimate Aleppo, and hundreds of thousands of
civilians in Syria’s largest city prepare for encirclement, blockade and
siege — and for the starvation and the barbarity that will inevitably
follow — it is time to proclaim the moral bankruptcy of American and
Western policy in Syria.

Actually, it is past time. The moral bankruptcy has been long in the
making: five years of empty declarations that Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad must go, of halfhearted arming of rebel groups, of allowing the
red line on chemical weapons to be crossed and of failing adequately to
share Europe’s refugee burden as it buckles under the strain of the
consequences of Western inaction. In the meantime, a quarter-million
Syrians have died, 7 million have been displaced and nearly 5 million
are refugees. Two million of the refugees are children.

This downward path leads to the truly incredible possibility that as the
Syrian dictator and his ruthless backers close in on Aleppo, the
government of the United States, in the name of the struggle against the
Islamic State, will simply stand by while Russia, Assad and Iran destroy
their opponents at whatever human cost.

It is time for those who care about the moral standing of the United
States to say that this policy is shameful. If the United States and its
NATO allies allow their inglorious new partners to encircle and starve
the people of Aleppo, they will be complicit in crimes of war. The ruins
of our own integrity will be found amid the ruins of Aleppo.
Indiscriminate bombardment of civilians is a violation of the Geneva
Conventions. So is the use of siege and blockade to starve civilians. We
need not wait for proof of Assad’s and Vladimir Putin’s intentions as
they tighten the noose. “Barrel bombs” have been falling on bread lines
and hospitals in the city (and elsewhere in Syria) for some time.
Starvation is a long-standing and amply documented instrument in Assad’s
tool kit of horrors.

Aleppo is an emergency, requiring emergency measures. Are we no longer
capable of emergency action? It is also an opportunity, perhaps the last
one, to save Syria. Aleppo is the new Sarajevo, the new Srebrenica, and
its fate should be to the Syrian conflict what the fate of Sarajevo and
Srebrenica were to the Bosnian conflict: the occasion for the United
States to bestir itself, and for the West to say with one voice,
“Enough.” It was after Srebrenica and Sarajevo — and after the air
campaign with which the West finally responded to the atrocities — that
the United States undertook the statecraft that led to the Dayton
accords and ended the war in Bosnia.

The conventional wisdom is that nothing can be done in Syria, but the
conventional wisdom is wrong. There is a path toward ending the horror
in Aleppo — a perfectly realistic path that would honor our highest
ideals, a way to recover our moral standing as well as our strategic
position. Operating under a NATO umbrella, the United States could use
its naval and air assets in the region to establish a no-fly zone from
Aleppo to the Turkish border and make clear that it would prevent the
continued bombardment of civilians and refugees by any party, including
the Russians. It could use the no-fly zone to keep open the corridor
with Turkey and use its assets to resupply the city and internally
displaced people in the region with humanitarian assistance.

If the Russians and Syrians sought to prevent humanitarian protection
and resupply of the city, they would face the military consequences. The
U.S. military is already in hourly contact with the Russian military
about de-conflicting their aircraft over Syria, and the administration
can be in constant contact with the Russian leadership to ensure that a
humanitarian protection mission need not escalate into a great-power
confrontation. But risk is no excuse for doing nothing. The Russians and
the Syrians would immediately understand the consequences of U.S. and
NATO action: They would learn, in the only language they seem to
understand, that they cannot win the Syrian war on their repulsive
terms. The use of force to protect civilians, and to establish a new
configuration of power in which the skies would no longer be owned by
the Syrian tyrant and the Russian tyrant, may set the stage for a tough
and serious negotiation to bring an end to the slaughter.

This is what U.S. leadership in the 21st century should look like:
bringing together force and diplomacy, moral commitment and strategic
boldness, around an urgent humanitarian objective that would command the
support of the world. The era of our Syrian abdication must end now. If
we do not come to the rescue of Aleppo, if we do not do everything we
can to put a stop to the suffering that is the defining and most
damaging abomination of our time, Aleppo will be a stain on our
conscience forever.

Read more on this topic:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-era-of-us-abdication-on-syria-must-end/2016/02/09/55226716-ce96-11e5-88cd-753e80cd29ad_story.html

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 19, 2016, 7:48:05 PM2/19/16

to

On 2/18/2016 9:45 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:

> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
>> that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
>> horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
>> in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
>> will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.
>>
>

> But ... but ... isn't this just more clever Obama diplomacy, like The
> Case of the Bright Red Line?
>
> Don't you love your President any more, Jonathan?
>
>

On this issue of Syria I'm more than disappointed, but
embarrassed to be an American. His half-assed strategy
and empty words are shameful, it's no wonder Putin
does whatever he likes.

But unfortunately for Putin, that is a double-edged
sword, Ergodan doesn't have to worry about Pres Obama
stopping him either.

This Jimmy Carter-like weakness on Syria is going
to start a war, and create countless more casualties
than it prevents. On the other hand, however, his
lame duck status preventing a more assertive
strategy (now)is understandable, but he should've
thought of that a year ago.

The Cease fire officially begins today, what a joke
the two committees that were supposed to iron out
the various details of the cease fire haven't
even met yet.

Kerry is a joke believing a thing coming out of Russia.

Ergodan is going to use Putin's strategy in E Ukraine
against Russia in Syria, sending in lots of little
green men, not openly invading. Create a frozen
conflict for Putin to endure at great cost.

If this were a Hollywood plot, no one would believe it~

s

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 20, 2016, 4:43:27 AM2/20/16

to

On 2/19/2016 11:51 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/18/2016 9:45 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
>>>> that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
>>>> horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
>>>> in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
>>>> will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But ... but ... isn't this just more clever Obama diplomacy, like The
>>> Case of the Bright Red Line?
>>>
>>> Don't you love your President any more, Jonathan?
>>>
>>
>> On this issue of Syria I'm more than disappointed, but
>> embarrassed to be an American. His half-assed strategy
>> and empty words are shameful, it's no wonder Putin
>> does whatever he likes.
>>
>

> Remember when I told you this was where we were headed back during the
> 'triumph' of the Bright Red Line over chemical weapons.
>
>>
>> This Jimmy Carter-like weakness on Syria ...
>>
>
> It's not just on Syria. It's pretty much everywhere. It's why Russia
> and China are pushing limits.
>

China isn't a problem, the whole island building thing
is more of a distraction than a direct threat. The
Chinese are practical and not looking for a war.
Our relationship with China is rather good
all things considered.

>>
>> ... is going

>> to start a war, and create countless more casualties
>> than it prevents. On the other hand, however, his
>> lame duck status preventing a more assertive
>> strategy (now)is understandable, but he should've
>> thought of that a year ago.
>>
>

> Some of us DID think of it all a year ago, but our comments were
> denigrated with tales of the triumph of brilliant Obama diplomacy in
> letting the Russians let Syria out of the box over their use of
> chemical weapons while failing to get rid of those weapons.
>
>

I still firmly believe the chemical weapons deal was
the right thing to do, a bombing campaign that lasted
a few days would've felt good but done nothing.

Getting rid of the largest stockpile of chemical weapons
in the Middle East in a nation in danger of being
overrun by god knows who is a big accomplishment.

Where I think Pres Obama 'fell down' on Syria was
the refusal to set up a no-fly zone in northern
Syria and support a Turkish safe zone. That could
have changed everything, stopping the Russian
advance, protecting the anti-Assad rebels and
kept the supply lines open. But Pres Obama
blinked on that and now Syria is paying the
price.

But who knows, maybe Putin will create such
a huge humanitarian crisis that it might
still happen. At least Pres Obama refused
to let the Russian UN resolution stopping
Turkey from shelling Syria pass, that
in itself is a big deal, Ergodan can now
use Putin's tactics of little green men
and creating a frozen conflict against
him, and make Syria very expensive for
Putin with no end in sight.

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 20, 2016, 2:09:40 PM2/20/16

to

On 2/20/2016 9:55 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/19/2016 11:51 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/18/2016 9:45 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
>>>>>> that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
>>>>>> horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
>>>>>> in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
>>>>>> will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But ... but ... isn't this just more clever Obama diplomacy, like The
>>>>> Case of the Bright Red Line?
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't you love your President any more, Jonathan?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On this issue of Syria I'm more than disappointed, but
>>>> embarrassed to be an American. His half-assed strategy
>>>> and empty words are shameful, it's no wonder Putin
>>>> does whatever he likes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Remember when I told you this was where we were headed back during the
>>> 'triumph' of the Bright Red Line over chemical weapons.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This Jimmy Carter-like weakness on Syria ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's not just on Syria. It's pretty much everywhere. It's why Russia
>>> and China are pushing limits.
>>>
>>

>> China isn't a problem, ...
>>
>
> Someone should tell all their neighbors and all the people they're
> pushing. China wants to be the regional power in the Asian Pacific.
> Presumably a year or so from now you'll pick up on this.
>

It'll take ten or fifteen years for China to
build up the forces it needs to be a problem.
By then Chinese communists will have gone
the way of the Soviet Union and a half
dozen new democracies and US allies to be
will replace Communist China.

Why China Wants South China Sea
http://thediplomat.com/2011/07/why-china-wants-the-south-china-sea/

>>>>
>>>> ... is going
>>>> to start a war, and create countless more casualties
>>>> than it prevents. On the other hand, however, his
>>>> lame duck status preventing a more assertive
>>>> strategy (now)is understandable, but he should've
>>>> thought of that a year ago.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some of us DID think of it all a year ago, but our comments were
>>> denigrated with tales of the triumph of brilliant Obama diplomacy in
>>> letting the Russians let Syria out of the box over their use of
>>> chemical weapons while failing to get rid of those weapons.
>>>
>>
>> I still firmly believe the chemical weapons deal was
>> the right thing to do, a bombing campaign that lasted
>> a few days would've felt good but done nothing.
>>
>

> Arguing out of both sides of your mouth now?
>

Bullshit. It was the right thing to do, do
you really think anyone would be better off
right now if Assad still had that stockpile.

And do you really think a short bombing
campaign would've removed Assad?

You should try thinking before speaking
once in a while.

>>
>> Getting rid of the largest stockpile of chemical weapons
>> in the Middle East in a nation in danger of being
>> overrun by god knows who is a big accomplishment.
>>
>

> That was not accomplished.
>

Bullshit!

>>
>> Where I think Pres Obama 'fell down' on Syria was
>> the refusal to set up a no-fly zone in northern
>> Syria and support a Turkish safe zone. That could
>> have changed everything, stopping the Russian
>> advance, protecting the anti-Assad rebels and
>> kept the supply lines open. But Pres Obama
>> blinked on that and now Syria is paying the
>> price.
>>
>

> So you think where President Obama fell down was in not going to war
> directly with Russia after encouraging them? Jesus, but your a
> dimwit.
>

So you think Pres Obama's policy in Syria
is correct then? You agree he should have
and continue to do nothing?

Which is it?

You wanted Pres Obama to bomb Damascus
but not set up a no fly zone, which
is obviously a far less dangerous
option than an air...attack.

Do you even think at all, let alone
before speaking?

>

Andrew Swallow

unread,

Feb 20, 2016, 5:56:29 PM2/20/16

to

On 20/02/2016 19:10, Jonathan wrote:
{snip}

> It'll take ten or fifteen years for China to
> build up the forces it needs to be a problem.
> By then Chinese communists will have gone
> the way of the Soviet Union and a half
> dozen new democracies and US allies to be
> will replace Communist China.
>

Possibly but for the next few years China will be replacing managers
with 'loyalists'. This will hurt its sales.

jonathan

unread,

Feb 20, 2016, 8:53:21 PM2/20/16

to

On 2/20/2016 8:20 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:

> who did ISIL get the nitrogen mustard from?

They made it, some of us read and don't
just assume.

CIA Director John Brennan spoke publicly about the issue
recently, saying on CBS News’s “60 Minutes” Sunday that
the CIA believes ISIS has the ability to manufacture
small quantities of chlorine and mustard.

Those comments reflect the U.S.’s testing of about
10 different samples collected from the battlefield
that show a rudimentary ability to manufacture chlorine
and mustard into weapons, according to the second U.S.
defense official.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/269551-isis-used-chemical-weapons-against-the-kurds-us-officials-say

gamo

unread,

Feb 21, 2016, 2:40:42 AM2/21/16

to

El 19/02/16 a las 02:43, Jonathan escribió:

> I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
> that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
> horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
> in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
> will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.
>
>

There is a contradiction. If you want to stop the crimes and
don't "ignite a wider war," go diplomatic and get a pause
status over the field. I think you mean Aleppo.

>
>
> The Washington Post
>
> Opinions
>
> Enough is enough — U.S. abdication on Syria must come to an end

That's an opinion, not an article or an editorial from that media.

--
http://gamo.eu.pn/
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 21, 2016, 6:37:56 AM2/21/16

to

On 2/21/2016 2:40 AM, gamo wrote:
> El 19/02/16 a las 02:43, Jonathan escribió:
>> I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
>> that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
>> horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
>> in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
>> will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.
>>
>>
>
> There is a contradiction. If you want to stop the crimes and
> don't "ignite a wider war," go diplomatic and get a pause
> status over the field. I think you mean Aleppo.
>

>>>
>>>

>>
>>
>> The Washington Post
>>
>> Opinions
>>
>> Enough is enough — U.S. abdication on Syria must come to an end
>
> That's an opinion, not an article or an editorial from that media.
>

Right, it's the opinion of these two...

By Michael Ignatieff and Leon Wieseltier February 9

Michael Ignatieff is the Edward R. Murrow professor of
practice at the Harvard Kennedy School. Leon Wieseltier
is the Isaiah Berlin Senior Fellow in Culture and Policy
at the Brookings Institution.

Jonathan

S

gamo

unread,

Feb 21, 2016, 7:39:19 AM2/21/16

to

El 21/02/16 a las 12:38, Jonathan escribió:

> On 2/21/2016 2:40 AM, gamo wrote:
>> El 19/02/16 a las 02:43, Jonathan escribió:
>>> I feel the same way, US inaction has become so embarrassing
>>> that is amounts to being an accomplice to the massive and
>>> horrific crimes against humanity taking place every day
>>> in Syria. If the US continues to sit on it's hands this
>>> will spin out of control and ignite a wider war.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There is a contradiction. If you want to stop the crimes and
>> don't "ignite a wider war," go diplomatic and get a pause
>> status over the field. I think you mean Aleppo.
>>
>
>
>
> But we've seen diplomacy that isn't backed up
> by credible threats of action on the ground
> is useless. Putin knows Pres Obama isn't going
> to do anything other than wave paper at him.
> So Putin will continue to do as he pleases.

But there are other affairs, as economic sanctions.
On the contrary, you could not 'do the right thing'
and take down these russian bombers without an
escalation of the conflict.

Andrew Swallow

unread,

Feb 21, 2016, 1:06:38 PM2/21/16

to

On 21/02/2016 12:51, Fred J. McCall wrote:

> jonathan <Wr...@Instead.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/20/2016 8:20 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>
>>> who did ISIL get the nitrogen mustard from?
>>>
>>
>> They made it, some of us read and don't
>> just assume.
>>
>

> Read a little more closely. MAY have the ability. So is it more
> likely they have a nice factory somewhere or that they took some from
> somewhere that fell under their control?
>
>
Most chemical and oil engineers have the skills to make mustard gas but
when ISIS takes over would they stay? Or would they move to some where
safer?

Get hold of any specialist tools required to make mustard gas will be
difficult. Machines able to mass produce weapons of mass destruction
need special export licences.

Uncle Steve

unread,

Feb 24, 2016, 4:17:38 PM2/24/16

to

Sure. It's not like you can make explosives with natural gas,
food-grade mineral oil, an industrial food mixer, plus a few
innocuous items available nearly anywhere. Or so I'm told.

--
WARNING: possible impersonation attempt

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 24, 2016, 7:59:23 PM2/24/16

to

On 2/21/2016 7:51 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:

> jonathan <Wr...@Instead.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/20/2016 8:20 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>
>>> who did ISIL get the nitrogen mustard from?
>>>
>>
>> They made it, some of us read and don't
>> just assume.
>>
>

> Read a little more closely. MAY have the ability. So is it more
> likely they have a nice factory somewhere or that they took some from
> somewhere that fell under their control?
>
>

The chemical weapons sites in Syria are in the
east of the nation, far from ISIS controlled
areas, although there were production facilities
in Aleppo and Hama which are half under control
of rebel groups, not ISIS but not very secure
either.

Syria's chemical weapons stockpile
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22307705

Battle for Iraq and Syria in maps
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27838034

It just seems to me the CIA having samples should
be able to tell if the mustard gas was produced
by amateurs or pros.

Jonathan

unread,

Feb 24, 2016, 8:12:24 PM2/24/16

to

There have been calls for increasing the sanctions
on Russia due to the recent humanitarian crisis
from Russian bombing, that's an approach I like too.

Responding militarily to a military provocation
from Russia can easily start a tit-for-tat escalation
that can spiral out of control and end up
with nuclear brinkmanship. But by responding
'asymmetrically' with economic sanctions
short circuits that step by step escalation.

But Assad with Putin's overt support has
created some 6 or 8 million refugees and
another million might come in the next week
or two if the bombing and siege of Aleppo
continues.

Those refugees are how Putin is dividing Nato
and weakening the EU's commitment to sanctions.
Europe will want the refugee problem to go away worse
than the want sanctions to stay and knuckle under
on sanctions.

If Putin truly believed the US would create a no fly
zone or safe zone in northern Syria, the peace
process could have a chance, but without a
credible threat of intervening it'll be a
one sided cease fire where Russia does
whatever it likes.

PaxPerPoten

unread,

Feb 24, 2016, 11:57:10 PM2/24/16

to

More then likely furnished by the CIA.

--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster

Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.

unread,

Feb 25, 2016, 12:04:58 AM2/25/16

to

> On 2/24/2016 7:00 PM, Jonathan wrote:
>>
>> Syria's chemical weapons stockpile
>> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22307705

well my 10th grader friend your info is way old and now false.
;-)

Uncle Steve

unread,

Feb 25, 2016, 1:31:14 PM2/25/16

to

> Oh, you can make explosives much more easily than that. But that's
> kind of irrelevant, since mustard gas isn't an explosive. To be
> militarily meaningful, you need relatively large quantities of the
> stuff. You're not going to turn that out in your kitchen.

The subject: WMD; do you read English?

As to 'militarily meaningful', that all depends on context. Small
quantities of high-explosives can be strategic in a way that a
conventional aerial bombardment may not be able to match. High value
targets have no set size, after all.

I should think that small units with the ability to fabricate HE and
detonators from in-situ resources might be decisive in certain types
of conflict. At any rate, adapting commonly available industrial
machines and materials to war production purposes is a no brainer for
anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together. There's
probably a series of US Army FMs on this very topic. It's not rocket
science, as they say.