Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Same Old, Same Old in Syria
Townhall.com ^ | September 5, 2013 | Victor Davis Hanson

Posted on 09/05/2013 3:46:15 AM PDT by Kaslin

President Obama's on-and-off-again planned American attack on Syria is nothing new. Besides its five declared wars, America has a habit of intervening all over the world.

Even apart from clandestine CIA operations, and even after the unhappy end of the Vietnam War, we have attacked lots of countries and non-state militias.

The roll call of recent American military interventions is quite astounding: Cambodia, Iran, Libya, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Liberia, Iraq, Haiti, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, Zaire and Afghanistan.

Even the notion of Past American isolationism is a myth. In the four years between 1912 and 1916 alone, the U.S. sent troops into Cuba, Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, the Dominican Republic and Haiti.

Even those busy years of intervention were not novel. Since our infancy, the U.S. military has been constantly engaged. In another four-year period between 1812 and 1816, America fought the British, the French, the Spanish and the North Africans.

(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Germany; Japan; Mexico; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: 0bama; afghanistan; cambodia; cuba; dominicanrepublic; germany; grenada; haiti; honduras; iran; iraq; japan; lebanon; liberia; libya; mexico; nicaragua; panama; somalia; syria; syriancivilwar; unitedkingdom; usintervention; victordavishanson; vietnam; yugoslavia; zaire

1 posted on 09/05/2013 3:46:15 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Here is a DOCTRINE that every Conservative should adopt:

America should only use her Military power in hostilities when threatened or attacked or when a trusted ally is threatened or attacked. A formal Declaration of War should be passed as soon as practicable and once hostilities start, America should fight an all out war until our enemies are vanquished. We are not the UN’s or World's police force. Attacking America or her allies should be seen as signing a death warrant to all those that wish us harm.

LLS

2 posted on 09/05/2013 3:57:29 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

add when we intend to wipe out their entire military to boot.

Grass Fire Email alert: left off the request for funding.

GRASSFIRE ALERT:

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 10-7 this afternoon to approve a resolution authorizing President Obama to use military force against Syria in response to President Bashar Assad’s suspected chemical-weapons attack on civilians last month.

But the rushed vote reportedly broke Senate rules for moving legislation through the committee process. According to The Daily Beast, a senior GOP Senate aide called it “a rush to war behind closed doors,” adding:

“We were told there was a need to have a thoughtful and public debate about how this nation goes to war, but this seems to be about simply getting a resolution done to cover the President.”

Today’s actions allow for a vote by the full Senate as soon as Wednesday and enable the Democrat-controlled “upper chamber” to pass a war resolution before the House can write and pass one of its own.

Moments after the vote, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East, told FOX News that when Representatives return to Capitol Hill next week, Obama’s plan will likely by-pass committee and move directly to the chamber floor for a vote.

+ + Should Congress Back Obama On Syria?

Congress’ month-long summer recess ends in just five days — with a full Syria vote expected almost immediately. That gives grassroots Americans less than a week to make their voices heard!

From the Rose Garden on Saturday, President Obama said, “While I believe I have the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization ... I’m asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move forward together as one nation.”

But our “Radical-in-Chief” has it wrong ... again. According to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, “Congress shall have the power ... to declare war.”

That’s why grassroots Americans must act now! It’s liberty-loving Americans who need to send a message to Congress about backing Obama’s plan. Tell your Senators and Representative what you think about authorizing the President to launch a military strike against Syria.

+ + Make Your Voice Heard On Capitol Hill!

Yesterday, Grassfire launched a Syria quick poll to empower our team members and their fellow patriots to make their voices heard. In just 24 hours, more than 28,000 of you have responded — with 97 percent voting “No!” on granting Obama authority to conduct military operations in Syria.

Grassfire will deliver the quick-poll results to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) next week, prior to any vote. You can use the time remaining to expand the impact of your “vote” by faxing your two Tennessee Senators, Representative and other key lawmakers.

BTW cry baby only uses a answering machine which is ALWAYS FULL! He does not want to hear from us SERFS.


3 posted on 09/05/2013 4:21:06 AM PDT by GailA (THOSE WHO DON'T KEEP PROMISES TO THE MILITARY, WON'T KEEP THEM TO U!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements.” Washington’s Farewell Address

“Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, ENTANGLING ALLIANCES WITH NONE; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-republican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people—a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burdened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected.” Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address (emphasis added)


4 posted on 09/05/2013 4:26:28 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

I would say that your part about fighting an all out war until our enemies are vanquished is unrealistic at times. In the sense that few times in history do we have the scenario of our enemies formally surrendering such as Japan and Germany at the end of WWII. We are dealing with non state actors now as our enemies. When we have that scenario, what constitutes vanquishing our enemies? Killing the head of the enemy is very difficult and tricky indeed. It also may not end the threat as someone else could simply take over the non state organization.

No, the answer to this is have clearly defined objectives and when those objectives are accomplished, then victory can be declared. Fighting an all out war until our enemies are vanquished could be the objective, but it does not have to be. The correct statement should be to fight an all out war until our clearly defined objectives are met.


5 posted on 09/05/2013 4:41:34 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot; Kaslin; neverdem; EXCH54FE; 2ndDivisionVet; Rummyfan; smoothsailing; Hojczyk; ...

VDH ping.


6 posted on 09/05/2013 4:44:48 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Well stated and I agree 100%.. We'd have a lot fewer dead young men who's familys miss them terribly. Only go to war when we are attacked, stop foreign aid to dictators stay the hell out of other countries business....we act like the nosy old cat lady that lives down the street and butts her nose into every ones business,,,,,,,.....talk softly and carry a big stick. I don't want the world to love us, we should mind our own business but let the rest of the world fear us. Fight when necessary, but fight to win....... World war 2 took less time them most of what we do today on others lands..

Remember that is what Jesus will do.

7 posted on 09/05/2013 4:49:22 AM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GailA

Well we have convinced our Congressman to vote against this illegal action that America stands firmly against. EVERYTHING that the government does is questionable and much of it is illegal because it is not Constitutional.


8 posted on 09/05/2013 5:02:01 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
All that your way does is to allow more police actions and we no longer have a government that can be trusted with those powers. If a war is worth fighting... then end should be a fight for ALL OUT VICTORY or it should not be fought. If you kill enough of the enemy and decimate his civilian population... they will be vanquished. The day of limited strikes should be over.

I have no problem taking out pockets of terrorists and leaders with pinpoint attacks... this is not what we are talking about. We are talking about attacking a sovereign nation without any clear evidence and without any clear and precise plan... we do not even have a set of goals to accomplish. This is what we must stop and I have offered the path our Founders talked about.

9 posted on 09/05/2013 5:06:24 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goat granny

I hope that JESUS takes me as HIS sword. I love GOD, I love my country and I love my family. Those are the things worth fighting for. They represent Freedom, Liberty and without GOD... there can be no sustained Happiness.

LLS


10 posted on 09/05/2013 5:12:48 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

HIS enemies will disappear, He fights to win and will do so..I read the end of the book...LOL Satan loses and when temptations in thought come along I remind it of that...:O)


11 posted on 09/05/2013 5:20:17 AM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

-——the president can’t decide on the real objective in Syria——

You speak of threats and attacks in the abstract and don’t list the actual extended list of threats and attacks. Your focus is too tight and fails to include the wider scope of reality.

America and allies, Israel and the GCC have received numerous threats and attacks beginning many years ago. The source is Iran, delivered by both Iran and it’s surrogates.

Syria is the present primary surrogate.

We have a security interest in the extermination of Assad and removal of surrogate status. When Syria goes, Hezbollah goes and Lebanon is once again free. Iran is weakened.

The problem is Obama is a chickenshit wimp unable to speak out against Iran and pull the triggers necessary to destroy Assad.

If the limited war destroys Assad, I’m all for it. If it merely hits a chemical weapons site that manufactures ibuprofen, then it is a profound waste of everything.

I’m told Senator Corker, McCain and others want war for this reason. I have my doubts, but he may know the extent of the unrevealed war plan.


12 posted on 09/05/2013 5:30:37 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Travon... Felony assault and battery hate crime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Throughout human history, warfare has been a common method for governments to deal with the problem of large numbers of unemployed young men. Such things as the Vikings and the Crusades are some of the more famous examples, but there are dozens more. Some might even include WWII.

I totally agree with your proposed doctrine, but I don’t believe it will ever be followed by our Ruling Class overlords.


13 posted on 09/05/2013 6:14:18 AM PDT by EricT. (Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Big brother is watching you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Sometimes I wonder why we’re not declaring war against Mexico because it’s got those nasty drug cartels wreaking havoc right on our border, and within our border.

The war on drugs would then resemble a war, and anyway, drugs are chemicals!


14 posted on 09/05/2013 6:39:13 AM PDT by HomeAtLast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert

I am not going to write a treatise with all contentions covered as no one will ever implement anything that I write. I am just an American who knows the truth and knows much of what drives the corruption in DC. I will say that there is NO reason for us to attack syria at this time. I say it and Israel says it. The time to attack syria was long ago. IF we have a fight in the ME it is with iran... we have been at war with them since 1979... even though America ignores that war. If we ever go to war with iran, we had better fight like we did against Japan and Germany. We must fight all out and if they use nukes... we erase them from mankind. No more half measures and no more rules of engagement that favor the enemy and political correctness. That is what I am talking about.


15 posted on 09/05/2013 6:51:13 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; SkyPilot; Yehuda; Netz; oneamericanvoice; left that other site; 2ndDivisionVet; ...

“A Short Guide to the Middle East” supported by Liberal and RINO Politicians

Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are
against Assad! Assad is against Muslim
Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama
are against General Sisi [Egypt]! But Gulf states
are pro Sisi! Which means they are against Muslim
Brotherhood! Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas
is backing Muslim Brotherhood! Obama is
backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is
against the U.S.! Gulf states are pro United
States. But Turkey is with Gulf states
against Assad; yet Turkey is pro Muslim
Brotherhood against General Sisi. And ...
General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf
states! Welcome to the Middle East and have
a nice day.


16 posted on 09/05/2013 6:59:17 AM PDT by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EricT.

I have no doubt that it will ever be implemented. It may be adhered to under certain Presidents from time to time but I agree with you Eric.

LLS


17 posted on 09/05/2013 7:04:42 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

That makes my head hurt!

What an up side down world we live in ;(


18 posted on 09/05/2013 8:35:32 AM PDT by Las Vegas Ron ("Medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism" Vladimir Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

Obama has been a Sisi man for decades, if you know what I mean.


19 posted on 09/05/2013 9:51:51 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I aim to raise a million plus for Gov. Palin. What'll you do?.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead
...add to that a bumbling and indecisive US President and you get a dangerous brew of nitroglycerin...
20 posted on 09/05/2013 10:54:05 AM PDT by Netz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Netz

The American people are against this BS by a “huge” majority.


21 posted on 09/05/2013 2:48:46 PM PDT by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

the only people who are for this thing reside inside the beltway. Everyone else on the planet, including Syrians are against it.


22 posted on 09/05/2013 2:50:54 PM PDT by newnhdad (Our new motto: USA, it was fun while it lasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-05/standoff-mediterranean-us-vs-russian-navies

Check this out and pass it on.


23 posted on 09/05/2013 3:18:52 PM PDT by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
"I have no problem taking out pockets of terrorists and leaders with pinpoint attacks... this is not what we are talking about."

Actually, this is what we are talking about. Anytime you use your military in an act of agression against a state or a non state organization, that's war. That would be a WWII type of war (war against states) or something like the War on Terror (war against non state entities). In the case of the latter, what is vanquishing the enemy? Al Quada is never going to formally come to the table and surrendor. In these instances, we have to make clearly stated objectives, not some amorphorus "vanquishing the enemy". There are also times where you conduct limited war against states without needing to completely anihilate them and you still obtain your objectives.

The only time that the CnC should be allowed unilateral powers to use our military forces without getting approval from the Congress is when Americans have been attacked and there is no time to go to Congress. A true emergency such as the Benghazi attack.
24 posted on 09/06/2013 12:42:26 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

I understand. If obama wants a real war... take out iran. He will never do that.


25 posted on 09/06/2013 1:40:41 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
I've been reading up on various posts on the Syria 'crisis'.

I still think the latest "Being Your Own Man", "'Dominant' Obama", "The Light of Day", and "End Game" are Wretchard's recent bests, if not the best.

Not to distract or diminish this VDH article. Sorry if you think it is off topic (or worse, trolling).

26 posted on 09/07/2013 6:35:47 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Obama wants to improve Syria - like he improved Libya and Egypt.

Face it - everything this air-headed idiot touches turns to crap.


27 posted on 09/26/2013 4:13:13 PM PDT by Iron Munro (When a killer screams 'Allahu Akbar' you don't need to be mystified about a motive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson