This Is How Our Foreign Policy Decisions Are Now Reached

Annie

Not So Junior Member
So much for 'facts,' now it's 'commonsense' or 'we really, really think so, bombs away!



http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89a...tes-Syria/id-4b69473ef7ad4000bd4f14e6cd8bf2e8

Sep. 8, 2013 9:03 AM ET
US: 'Common-sense test' holds Assad responsible
AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House asserted Sunday that a "common-sense test" rather than "irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence" makes the Syrian government responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response.

As part of a major push to win the backing of a divided Congress and skeptical American public, Obama's top aide made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows to press the case for "targeted, limited consequential action to deter and degrade" the capabilities of Syrian President Bashar Assad "to carry out these terrible attacks again."

At the same time, chief of staff Denis McDonough acknowledged the risks that military action could drag the U.S. into the middle of a brutal civil war and endanger allies such as Israel with a retaliatory attack.

The U.S. is "planning for every contingency in that regard and we'll be ready for that," he told CNN's "State of the Union."

...
 
Finally they are admitting they don't know 'which side' did this, but their commonsense tells them Assad. This situation is clear as mud:

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-day-syria-reader-part-2-william-polk/279255/

Your Labor Day Syria Reader, Part 2: William Polk
By James Fallows

Many times I've mentioned the foreign-policy assessments of William R. Polk, at right, who first wrote for the Atlantic (about Iraq) during Dwight Eisenhower's administration, back in 1958, and served on the State Department's Policy Planning staff during the Kennedy years. He now has sent in a detailed analysis about Syria.

Polk wrote this just before President Obama switched from his go-it-alone policy and decided to seek Congressional approval for a Syrian strike. It remains relevant for the choices Congress, the public, and the president have to make. It is very long, but it is systematically laid out as a series of 13 questions, with answers. If you're in a rush, you could skip ahead to question #7, on the history and use of chemical weapons. Or #6, about the under-publicized role of drought, crop failure, and climate change in Syria's predicament. But please consider the whole thing when you have the time to sit down for a real immersion in Congress's upcoming decision. It wouldn't hurt if Senators and Representatives read it too.

By William Polk

Probably like you, I have spent many hours this last week trying to put together the scraps of information reported in the media on the horrible attack with chemical weapons on a suburb of Damascus on Wednesday, August 21. Despite the jump to conclusions by reporters, commentators and government officials, I find as of this writing that the events are still unclear. Worse, the bits and pieces we have been told are often out of context and usually have not been subjected either to verification or logical analysis. So I ask you to join me in thinking them through to try to get a complete picture on what has happened, is now happening and about to happen. I apologize for both the length of this analysis and its detail, but the issue is so important to all of us that it must be approached with care.

Because, as you will see, this is germane in examining the evidence, I should tell you that during my years as a member of the Policy Planning Council, I was "cleared" for all the information the US Government had on weapons of mass destruction, including poison gas, and for what was then called "Special Intelligence," that is, telecommunications interception and code breaking.

[JF note: This is the list of questions around which the rest of the essay is structured.] I will try to put in context 1) what actually happened; 2) what has been reported; 3) who has told us what we think we know; 4) who are the possible culprits and what would be their motivations; 5) who are the insurgents? 6) what is the context in which the attack took place; 7) what are chemical weapons and who has used them; 8) what the law on the use of chemical weapons holds; 9) pro and con on attack; 10) the role of the UN; 11) what is likely to happen now; 12) what would be the probable consequences of an attack and (13) what could we possibly gain from an attack.

1: What Actually Happened

...
 
puponderance of the evidence.

we execute people on that standard huh

Hmmm,
From the quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House asserted Sunday that a "common-sense test" rather than "irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence" makes the Syrian government responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response.

See, they DON'T HAVE the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence.
 
This brings out the fact that there is a huge propaganda push on for war. All the major networks news people are being briefed on how to promote the war.

No surprise really. You do what you need to do to get your wishes for war.

But we have to keep asking ourselves: Is Obama really completely onside with this effort?
 
The fact that they don't have evidence is of minor importance.

They don't care!

The socalled gas attacks are only the currently used justification for war.
 
The fact that they don't have evidence is of minor importance.

They don't care!

The socalled gas attacks are only the currently used justification for war.


how do you claim they didn't happen.

based on what?


your hate of America
 
preponderance of the evidence.

we execute people on that standard huh


What country do you live in....obviously not the US if you don't have a fuckin' clue
about its standard of evidence concerning cap. crime....
God damn, you're such an idiot.....typical democrat
 
have they examined any parts of the delivery system used to deliver the chemical weapons?......did they do any analysis on the gas used to see where it was manufactured?.....the Japanese used that process used to manufacture the sarin gas used in the 1995 attack and were able to get a conviction.....http://www.opcw.org/news/article/the-sarin-gas-attack-in-japan-and-the-related-forensic-investigation/
.
where has anyone claimed this was about gas?
 
Back
Top