Applying the 8 Questions of the Powell Doctrine to Syria

Remember the Powell doctrine? Elaborated by Colin Powell back in 1990, during his tenure as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it consisted of a series of questions identifying the conditions that should be met before committing U.S. military forces to battle. The questions were:

For Powell, each question had to be answered in the affirmative before a decision to use military force was made. If these conditions were met, however, Powell (and other military officers of his generation) believed that the United States should then use sufficient force to achieve decisive victory.

Like the closely related "Weinberger doctrine" (named for Reagan-era Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger), these guidelines were designed to ensure that the United States did not stumble into pointless wars whose costs far outweighed the benefits. Powell understood that civilians often had idealistic or quixotic ideas about improving the world with U.S. military power and that they were often too quick to employ it without thinking through the broader strategic implications. One might think of the Powell doctrine as a checklist designed to curb the well-intentioned but naive desire for global do-gooding that has inspired American liberal interventionists for decades.

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
Yes. Obama MUST help al Qaeda get more sarin, more SAMs,
and ANOTHER country.

2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
Yes. Obama delights in having helped HIS al Qaeda
get sarin, SAMs, MANPADs, and this getting them more
is an easy objective with the passive Congress.

3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
Yes. Blowback will be against Israel and the
American military
(a dream condition for Obama-the-Undocumented Moslem
Tyrant by Election Fraud)

....

7. Is the action supported by the American people?
No. But who cares? Obama represents Indonesia, Kenya,
Communism, Saudi Arabia, and al Qaeda, so WHO CARES
about the American people.

New World Order Doctrine:

1. Have your real planners (that work directly for the highest level new world order leadership) plan the “transitions” that nwo wants to see happen that accomplish nwo long-term goals and handle short-term contingencies.

2. Using your foundations, people placed inside governments, espionage / arms dealer / terrorist leaders all work on their parts of your plans separately, in a nice compartmentalized fashion, so nobody has a clue of the big picture.

3. If the transition can’t be done by a simple assassination or election manipulation, have your guys at CIA use their sister intelligence networks, e.g., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc., to produce a revolution.

4. If the revolution runs into a wall and can’t succeed, use your US Presidential advisors make the case for US military or clandestine involvment as necessary; use the Council on Foreign Relations to spread the word of what’s “on the agenda”, so analysis papers can be written that the advisors can use to provide cover for the President. CFR also would then let the news media know to start promoting the upcoming military action. Our small new world order-only team reporting to CIA leadership can develop an NIE (national intelligence estimate) which provides the intelligence evidence needed for a cause for war.

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.