Once again, the progressive mainstream media is ginning up the rationale for a military attack of Assad’s Syria.

Of course, it appears that British Naval Forces, assisted by United States forces, will mount the attack. Another example of Barack Obama leading from behind, or conversely, never involving himself in controversial matters when others can do the heavy lifting and become expendable if things go wrong.

All of which makes any proposed Syrian strike very troubling when you consider the following:  

• We have not heard conclusive proof that chemical weapons were actually used. All of the reports use weasel words giving no definitive proof of what chemical was used, the origin of the chemical, or which side used the chemical – if indeed someone did fire chemical-laden artillery shells. There is also the possibility that the shells were not fired, but were detonated in place using conventional explosives.
• There are some reports claiming that the chemical attack evidence might have been destroyed. [Syria chemical attack evidence may have been destroyed: Hague -- AFP - British Foreign Secretary William Hague on Sunday warned that any evidence of a chemical attack by the Syrian regime may have already been destroyed. "The fact is that much of the evidence could have been destroyed by that artillery bombardment," he cautioned during a press conference after Damascus gave its green light to a mission by UN inspectors. <Source>
• We know that it would be foolhardy and stupid to attack the chemical weapon depots using anything less than a tactical nuclear device or fuel-air explosive bomb to insure that the chemical agent would be vaporized and not drift on the wind to cause even greater loss of life. Cruise Missiles do not have the ability to destroy the chemical weapons or to penetrate underground or reinforced above-ground chemical weapon storage bunkers. So, other than a ground assault, direct attacks on chemical weapons appears to be off the table.
• We are left with asset targets such as aircraft and weaponry, and the command and control communications apparatus. We will assume that any attack would be on a military target and spare civilian lives.
• Barack Obama and his cadre of fellow travelers apparently are supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and an attempt to reintegrate the hated Muslim Brotherhood back into the political process.
• Assad is backed by Russia and that Russian equipment and technicians may be on the ground in Syria – possibly limiting our strike options.
• We know that President Obama has a penchant for seeking United Nations’ approvals, but that any such action is likely to be vetoed by Russia and China.

So what to make of the muddle?

It is in the rebel’s best interests to use chemical weapons because it would invite attacks on their enemies. It is not in Assad’s best interests to use such weapons because of further international condemnation. And for the conspiracy theorists, there is always the possibility of a covert false flag operation to make it appear that the other side did the dirty deed. But, without specific and credible proof, there is absolutely no justification for the involvement of British and U.S. forces. 

There appears to be no compelling national interest to interfere in Syrian affairs. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other regional neighbors DO NOT want the Muslim Brotherhood to succeed, take over a nation and impose radical theocratic Sharia law. So far, its Muslims killing Muslims, with the rebels being linked to al Qaeda. If Assad can kill representatives of al Qaeda and the radical Muslim Brotherhood, it appears to be a win-win for the Western world and its allies.

Here is the story …

Royal Navy vessels are being readied to take part in a possible series of cruise missile strikes, alongside the United States, as military commanders finalise a list of potential targets. Government sources said talks between the Prime Minister and international leaders, including Barack Obama, would continue, but that any military action that was agreed could begin within the next week. As the preparations gathered pace, William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, warned that the world could not stand by and allow the Assad regime to use chemical weapons against the Syrian people “with impunity”. Britain, the US and their allies must show Mr Assad that to perpetrate such an atrocity “is to cross a line and that the world will respond when that line is crossed”, he said. British forces now look likely to be drawn into an intervention in the Syrian crisis after months of deliberation and international disagreement over how to respond to the bloody two-year civil war.

The escalation comes as a direct response to what the Government is convinced was a gas attack perpetrated by Syrian forces on a civilian district of Damascus last Wednesday.

The Assad regime has been under mounting pressure to allow United Nations inspectors on to the site to establish who was to blame for the atrocity. One international agency said it had counted at least 355 people dead and 3,600 injured following the attack, while reports suggested the true death toll could be as high as 1,300. Syrian state media accused rebel forces of using chemical agents, saying some government soldiers had suffocated as a result during fighting.

After days of delay, the Syrian government finally offered yesterday to allow a team of UN inspectors access to the area. However, Mr Hague suggested that this offer of access four days after the attack had come too late.

“We cannot in the 21st century allow the idea that chemical weapons can be used with impunity, that people can be killed in this way and that there are no consequences for it,” he said.

Read more at: Navy ready to launch first strike on Syria - Telegraph

Bottom line …

My worry is that Obama is aiding both the Muslim Brotherhood and our Islamic enemies and this who affair is a charade – Kabuki theatre to shore up Obama’s sagging reputation as a competent leader. As Oliver Hardy was won’t to say: “Well , here's another nice mess you've gotten me into.

Barack Obama and his cadre of fellow travelers cannot be trusted – with our domestic affairs and especially not with our foreign affairs. This is the first time in my lifetime that I questioned whether or not a sitting President had America’s best interests at heart.

Obama lied about Benghazi, perpetrating a massive cover-up. Obama lied about Fast and Furious, perpetrating a massive cover-up. We must ask, when is Congress going to reassert their control over another potential war started by Obama for political reasons.

-- steve

Related articles

Obama's "Bumps in the Road" Turning Into Mountains

The Benghazi Scenario That Explains It All: Fast and Furious Gunwalking to Syrian Terrorists

FLASHBACK: US 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria, blame it on Assad govt': Report

UN team set to probe Syria attack

BBC and Democracy Now! Syrian Chemical Weapons Coverage: An exercise in Imperial deception

Hague: 'Syria attacked its own people with chemical weapons'. Icke: 'Hague you are a bloody liar promoting your masters' propaganda'

Syria lets UN inspect gas attack site, Washington says too late - Reuters

The BBC's Syrian Chemical Weapons Coverage: An Exercise in Imperial Deception By William Bowles

89% of Americans polled oppose Obama helping Syrian "rebels"

Syria agrees to let UN inspect site of alleged chemical weapons attack