Wonkbook: The Obama administration’s brilliant strategy to keep us out of Syria

[n2doc]

By Ezra Klein and Evan Soltas, Published: September 4

Privately, Hill aides joke that everything is going exactly to President Obama’s plan. It’s just that that plan is to stay far, far away from Syria.

This is the (tongue-in-cheek) 12-dimensional chess interpretation of the Obama administration’s Syria strategy. Boxed in by red-line rhetoric and the Sunday show warriors, the Obama administration needed to somehow mobilize the opposition to war in Syria. It did that by “fumbling” the roll-out terribly.

The arguments were lengthy and unclear. The White House expressly admitted that their strikes wouldn’t save Syrian lives or topple Assad or making anything better in any way, and they were instead asking Americans to bomb Syria in order to enforce abstract international norms of warfare. It would be the first military action in American history that wasn’t meant to save lives or win a war but to slightly change the mix of arms a dictator was using to slaughter his population.

All this was helpful in creating opposition. But then Obama turned on a dime and decided to go to Congress at the last minute, making his administration look indecisive and fearful of shouldering the blame for this unpopular intervention, putting the decision in the hands of a body famous for being unable to make decisions, giving the argument for strikes more time to lose support, and giving an American public that opposes intervention in Syria more time and venues to be heard.

And then, after all that, Obama goes to Congress with an absurdly broad force authorization — so broad that it doesn’t specify when it ends, or even really limit which countries can be hit. The force authorization offended even Obama’s allies in Congress, left many questioning his motives, and has now been thrown out by the Senate. Members of Congress and their aides I’ve spoken to remain shocked that Obama chose to come to Congress and then handed them that document.

more

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/04/wonkbook-the-obama-administrations-brilliant-strategy-to-keep-us-out-of-syria/

It's so brilliant it just might work!

[Robb]

1. LOL well, the theory does answer a whole lot of nagging questions.

[uponit7771]

2. Haven't read the authorization yet but if it's broad enough the writer might be correct. GOP will

..do everything to disagree with Obama

[dixiegrrrrl]

4. Link to authorization ( draft) here:

http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/text-of-senate-draft-syria-war-authorization/

[Harmony Blue]

3. Don't buy it

sometimes you have to accept something at face value for what it is.

[KoKo]

5. I took this as brilliant Sarcasm. Here's the last line of the original article:

quote:

"Believing anything else — like this is how the administration is actually leading the United States into conflict — is too unsettling.?

Sure sounds like sarcasm to me.

[n2doc]

7. Of course it is sarcasm

They admit it at the top. But there is a kernel of truth in there as well.

[mountain grammy]

6. For the most part, this administration's foreign policy has been good.

Even the Benghazi attack could be laid at the feet of our lousy Congress, though they won't admit it.

Now Congress must make the decision.. ha, that's a good one. The Senate is actually talking filibuster, as in they need 60 votes to vote on the authorization of military intervention. What a cluster we've gotten ourselves into and what better way to publicize it then putting this crisis in the hands of Congress.
Our media has drug out every fool, from W to Rumsfeld, to give us "advice." The right wing fools in Congress have been sniping at the administration for going on five years now, but never had to take the heat. Is this any way to run a country?

If McCain can play poker on his phone while being briefed on Syria, the President can play poker too. I think the administration is bluffing. I simply can't believe they are looking this incompetent on purpose.

[joeybee12]

8. Wow! Teresa's sleeping through her husband's speech!

[JPZenger]

9. Obama did not want to have it be a solely US attack, Congress provides cover

Obama said that he wanted a true coalition. When that potential disappeared, then he went to Congress. I think he'd rather have a denial by Congress than to have the US do it alone.

[GeorgeGist]

10. This is the war he road in on ...

can you spot the difference?