Obama: US Has Concluded That Syrian Government Carried Out Chemical Weapons Attack

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Wednesday declared unequivocally that the United States has "concluded" that the Syrian government carried out a deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians last week.

Obama did not present any direct evidence to back up his assertions. He said he is still evaluating possible military options in retaliation for the attack that killed hundreds near Damascus, but vowed that any American response would send a "strong signal" to Syrian President Bashar Assad.

"We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out," Obama said during an interview with PBS' NewsHour. "And if that's so, then there need to be international consequences."

White House press secretary Jay Carney answers questions about Syria and chemical weapons during his daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Aug. 27, 2013. The U.S. was expected to make public a more formal determination of chemical weapons use on Tuesday, however Carney stated that the president did not have a decision made about the response to announce at this time. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Earlier Wednesday, administration officials said they would take action against the Syrian government even without the backing of allies or the United Nations because diplomatic paralysis must not prevent a response to the alleged chemical weapons attack outside the Syrian capital. The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council failed to reach an agreement Wednesday on a draft resolution from the British seeking authorization for the use of force. Russia, as expected, objected to international intervention.

Read more: http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/c5c3acaf51df4da994a86f69d29f89af/US--United-States-Syria

---

"and if that's so, then..."

But wait, I thought he said the US has concluded it was Assad but then qualifies it with a "and if that's so, then"?

[Maedhros]

1. But you have proved that you will lie to our faces, Mr. President.

I just don't believe you.

If you make the claim that Syria is responsible, then you must provide evidence. Incontrovertible evidence.

I'm with Hans Blix: let the UN team finish its investigation before letting loose with the Shock and Awe.

[philosslayer]

3. I believe my President

n/t

[Maedhros]

5. Republicans believed Bush, too, when he told them Hussein had WMD. [n/t]

[philosslayer]

72. And you're comparing my President to Bush?

Really?

[Maedhros]

78. In his use of pro-war rhetoric, yes.

It should not come as a surprise - Obama's foreign policy is pretty much an extension of Bush's policies:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/24/bush-policies-still-alive-in-obama-white-house/?page=all

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/05/08/the-remarkable-similarities-between-barack-obama-and-george-w-bush/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/obama-george-bush_n_3145804.html

[sulphurdunn]

89. He's smarter.

After that the similarities begin.

[arewenotdemo]

94. Not nearly smart enough, unfortunately.

Surrounded himself with interventionist fools (Power, Rice, Clinton, and Kerry).

[another_liberal]

9. I believe that he's being lied to, lied to by people he mistakenly trusts.

Here's hoping he has the wisdom to see through those lies before he makes a terrible mistake.

[hopemountain]

37. and taunted

is it any "coincidence" that the chemicals were disbursed exactly a year to the date of our president's statement about drawing a line?

is it any "coincidence" that putin refers to the u.s. and our president as "a monkey with a hand grenade" (quoting a past statement attributed to chavez regarding former pres. bush).

makes me wonder why the taunts directed at our president? to draw in the u.s. to another money sucking war in an attempt to weaken our country financially and disperse our resources even more thinly?

and this is only part of the info available to us in the media.

we don't know the HALF of it. i really hope the president takes his time and takes the high road - the better part of valor.

[another_liberal]

58. Exactly.

Let him prove once and for all he knows what is true courage.

[totodeinhere]

41. It is a president's responsibility to solicit a wide variety of opinions before making

important decisions such as attacking another country. There are plenty of people available who can tell him the truth about what is going on. Obama can't be left off the hook by simply saying that his advisers are lying to him.

[another_liberal]

59. One thing I am completely certain about . . .

If we attack Syria and the whole thing backfires on us (as it undoubtedly will) one thing I am completely certain about is that President Obama will not, "Be left off the hook."

[sulphurdunn]

90. He most definitely will not.

[Arctic Dave]

56. To his detriment, he has surrounded himself with too many Judas.

It is one thing to keep your friends close and enemy closer but you should always remember, they are your enemy.

[another_liberal]

60. Indeed.

That is a problem which seems to have plagued him from his first days in office.

[arewenotdemo]

95. Seriously, on what freaking galaxy is it at all rational

to employ "Bomb Iran" John McCain and Miss Lindsay Graham to be your emissaries to Egypt?

Obama has no clue when it comes to foreign policy. Absolutely none.

[Ghost Dog]

67. He's surely not stupid.

He has, clearly, received his marching orders. Unless...

[another_liberal]

83. Our President is brilliant.

He is not, however, all-knowing. There are a few areas where his education may have been a little deficient (at least for someone in his current position) such as World History or Foreign Affairs. Remember when he caught so much flack for claiming his grandfather helped liberate Auschwitz? His grandfather helped liberate a concentration camp near Munich. Auschwitz, in Eastern Poland, was liberated by the Soviet army.

It can be easy for an unscrupulous person to hoodwink a well-meaning individual in an area where they don't have as much experience.

[HardTimes99]

84. It's Obama's Gulf of Tonkin\Niger Yellowcake moment. I hope he watched the

docudrama 13 Days and remembers that it was just JFK and RFK who stared down the war pigs in the Pentagon who wanted to bomb the Cuban missile sites, thereby ushering in World War III and the annihilation of mankind.

[another_liberal]

85. Too true.

Only this time our President must face-down AIPAC and the Israeli government as well as his own generals and the MIC lobbyists. He has to do it, though, or the Republicans will really steal our country next election time.

[HardTimes99]

87. If I'm a Republican politico, I'm now preparing two ad campaigns. One will criticize

Obama for involving us in another middle east quagmire. The other will criticize Obama for appeasing Assad. With his declaration of a 'red line,' Obama has committed the cardnial sin of politics, administering a self-inflicted wound.

[another_liberal]

88. Good God almighty!

I think you may be channeling Karl Rove!

Quick, say "I have the math" backward ten times.

[sulphurdunn]

91. You are correct.

He is he President and Commander-in-Chief. The decisions and the responsibility fall upon him. I don't know if he's big enough to buck the shadow government, even if he has the will and is willing to face the consequences. I'm not sure any President has since Kennedy.

[arewenotdemo]

96. General Dempsey doesn't want to attack Syria.

The military isn't the problem here.

[another_liberal]

101. Good for him!

We need a dozen more, at least, just like him.

I would not, though, give the our military as a whole a pass. I surely would like to, but experience has taught me to be more suspicious.

[Hydra]

19. NSA does not spy on us FTW!

Welcome to DU! You may want to read up a bit before joining the Ministry of Truthiness, but I'll leave that up to you.

[Maedhros]

24. ...and every campaign promise [n/t]

[pnwmom]

26. Welcome to DU, philosslayer! n/t

[avaistheone1]

27. He has already told us we can not believe him.

[frylock]

29. i don't

[Scootaloo]

30. I believe evidence, and distrust politicians

So a politician making an assertion with no evidence on hand is not something that I'm going to sell off on.

Once again, I'm not calling the man a liar. But I'm not going to accept an argument from authority.

[QuestForSense]

33. Not me.

Same methods the neo-cons used to justify their invasion of Iraq. Don't like it. Not the 'change' I voted for.

[movonne]

46. I love Obama.....BUT are we sure Obama is

what he says he is...I want so to believe ...but he is doing some strange thing that has put a doubt...

[City Lights]

51. I'm skeptical. nt

[movonne]

52. I with all my heart would like the believe in Obama..I

love him...but also some doubts are creeping in...that really kind of hurts...and one of the reason I voted for him is because of the Iraq...was against that war and did not think he would get us into another one...

[Autumn Colors]

13. To whoever reported this post ...

And to the juror whose explanation claimed that all those with opinions like the one above come from "libertarians who are overrunning DU" ... I'm a far left liberal democrat and consider myself the farthest thing from a libertarian there could be and while I wouldn't out and out say the president lied, I am NOT happy with the way the party and the president are drifting more and more to the right.

So no .... not everyone who criticizes the president on this site is a "libertarian". Some of us are just true blue progressive/liberal democrats.

[another_liberal]

17. Good for you!

That clearly needed to be said.

[Hydra]

21. Civil Liberties Dems are being told they are RWers

How the hell is that supposed to stick?

[Autumn Colors]

23. LOL - I've voted in every election since 1979

... and I've never voted for anyone other than a democrat. Anyone calling me a rightwinger is insane.

[Hydra]

25. I think they might be saying we don't need civil liberties anymore

I think the voting rights act debacle shows us exactly what happens when the law isn't there to protect you.

[Earth_First]

54. No worries, accusations of Libertarianism and "peace purist" are attempts by the authoritarians

who blindly support of party over policy.

There are many.

Peace be unto you, AC...

[Ghost Dog]

68. You're respectable. Thanks.

[axollot]

74. Agree and it is something I've done from day one. n/t

[deutsey]

18. When the president says it, it must be true.

[another_liberal]

2. At this point . . .

It would appear at this point our President may be concerned that if he does not launch an attack he will end up looking foolish. That is not an easy prospect for any prominent man to face, let alone a man who has attained the highest office in the land.

[azurnoir]

8. ^^^^^^this^^^^^^^

or IOW it's about saving face

[Autumn]

10. So are you saying this could happen just so he doesn't look foolish?

Cause that would really be fucked up.

[another_liberal]

14. I do believe he is a far better man than that would suggest.

However, even good men can have moments of weakness. It is very important, I'm sure you will agree, that this not be one of those moments for our President.

[Autumn]

39. It is vitally important that our President be strong and honest in this situation.

[mallard]

100. Re: If that's how it comes down ...

... the resulting arms contracts and a disabled Syria are all that matter to the real deciders who've occupied Washington for two decades and turned much of the Middle East into a civil war zone. Yes, it's not right.

[sulphurdunn]

49. A whole lot people will die

if we do this, good ones and bad ones. That would be a high price to make them pay to avoid looking foolish.

[HardTimes99]

86. One' mind goes immediately to Ecclesiastes: "Vanity, vanity, all is vanity." - nt

[dalter2009]

92. Kill innocent people to save face?

Deeds speak, Obama has funded the Syrian rebels from the beginning = Al Aqaeda which congress has declared we are at war with.
Providing material help to a declared enemy is the precise definition of treason.

Assad has no reason to use chemical weapons, the so called rebels do.

Obama is not smart he is obviously a puppet of our military industrial complex. When any of these peoples lips move, it is a 100% they are lying or misrepresenting the real facts and their real motives.

Trying to start another war in the middle east is worse than folly, it is a war crime.

Obama clearly did not reckon on actual honest citizens saying ENOUGH!!!

So Progressives, grow up, the democratic party leaders are just as crooked as the Republicans, in fact, worse because the Dem party is not Liberal as the founding fathers were.

[another_liberal]

93. Some of what you say is correct . . .

There are two points, however, about which you are definitely mistaken:

1. We have not been giving direct aid to the al Qaeda affiliated rebels. Some of the aid we have sent has been appropriated by them, but that is not the same thing at all.

2. Democratic Party leaders are not, I repeat not, nearly as corrupt as the Republican Party leaders. There is corruption in the Democratic Party, yes, but it is not owned lock, stock and barrel by big energy and Wall Street. Some Democratic leaders actually try to fight those interests. Can you name one prominent Republican who does?

[Autumn]

4. Please provide the evidence Sir.

[deutsey]

15. If he had solid evidence, he'd be falling all over himself to get it out to us n/t

[David__77]

6. Oh my fucking god. He can't even keep his talking points straight.

"If that's so?" That's not by chance or a linguistic slip up. It's telling. He knows it's not close to certain. I wonder if this is the same interview where he says he's unsure what to do, but there may need to be a "shot across the bow," i.e. slap on the wrist. What a clusterfuck of nonsense. I need to read the whole transcript.

[christx30]

42. I have 100%, incontrovertible,

Definite, bullseye type evidence that Santa Claus is real, not that I can, or should have to, prove it. And if that's the case, I want a puppy.
And that "shot across the bow" comment is just asinine. It used to mean a warning shot, designed to halt an enemy's advance or retreat. Not an actual bombing/shelling/cruise missile attack where real buildings are destroyed and real people die, which will cause attacks to be launched at Isreal by Syria and Iran.
I think the only thing that MIGHT make this better than Iraq is that there might be actual evidence of a WMD use. Whether it was al-Assad's people, the al Qaeda-linked rebels we are supporting, of an unknown third party that actually did the attack. But we don't yet have any proof of anything yet. But there seems to be a huge rush to war that can't be taken back. Billions will be spent. Lives will be lost. Alliances that hate the US will be cemented. And we can't even wait a week to find out something for sure.

[David__77]

44. What if there is NO evidence of use of banned weapons found by the UN team?

That would be very interesting indeed.

[christx30]

57. That's why we gotta go in there

now. Before the UN is able to complete their work. Can't let the people know the truth.
Who stood to benefit from the "attack"?
Not Assad. The US military is going to mess him up.
The rebels? It gets the US involved because of the red line.
The Russians? They get to sell Assad weapons trashed in the war.
Iran? They've been gagging for a reason to attack Isreal for years.
American war profiteers? That's a big "duh" there.
What's more likely? After two years of Civil War in which he's holding his own, al-Assad decides to launch a chemical attack against a suburban populations just for the hell of it?
Or an interested third party seeking wealth, power, social/political change, decides this powder keg needs to ignite and decides to strike a match?
Well, I may not be the smartest guy in the planet. I still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea (and how does that little plastic bird keep drinking the water?)But Obama has to have considered this. So either his people are very wrong, or he's hired people that are very good at lying to him, or he's complicit.

[Ghost Dog]

69. Remember what happened to JFK

and Jackie, and Bobby...

[arewenotdemo]

98. I hear you dude. You've been a true voice of reason.

But this shit is driving me insane.

When I watch Kerry anymore, I'm getting flashbacks to Rumsfeld and the other evil Death's Heads that destroyed Iraq.

It's like a bad sci-fi movie where the human mask splits apart to reveal the Roach Within.

At this point I believe that Obama's weak and...smitten...and Samantha Power has been calling the shots for some time (Libya).

[arewenotdemo]

99. About Samantha Power...

I'd want proof...karyotype-proof...of a second X chromosome.

[leveymg]

7. If the intercepts prove anything, it's that some Maj. Ripper type launched the attack on his own.

Might as well blame President Merkin Muffley for that errant SAC wing sent to bomb Russia to protect America's precious bodily fluids. Since the red line has been crossed -- doesn't matter who or why -- we might as well all die fighting to win it.

This is as insane as the plot line of "Dr. Strangelove"- psychotic Maj. Ripper sets off WW3 to protect precious bodily fluids. Some middling officer commanding an isolated unit in northern suburb of Damascus fires off some chemical rounds, which is something the Syrian Defense Minister is clearly upset by, and everyone else has to die winning the war. Utterly insane.

Do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream.

You know when fluoridation first began? Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
-- General Jack D. Ripper

[pangaia]

16. One of my favorite films, ever.

The one in black and white. Not the current one.

[karynnj]

31. If that is what happened, perhaps ASSAD is the one who needs to get that out

- after arresting and filing charges against the man who led it.

If that happened, it could diffuse the entire thing. Instead - the first response is that it did not happen and the second that the rebels did it.

[leveymg]

34. There may be a job in the Syrian Press Ministry for you - may want to avoid the building for a few

days, though.

[karynnj]

36. What are you talking about?

What I am saying is that Assad has NOT gone after the "culprit". If this were not sanctioned, don't you think the head of state would go after a person who committed the murder of possibly greater than a thousand people?

I guess I should have pointed that out more directly -- rather than indicating what SHOULD have happened if your conjecture was correct.

[leveymg]

38. If the Syrian military is what I imagine it to be, that officer is no longer in command

or available for comment.

The White House needs to release the intercepts so the rest of us can hear what was actually said, and make up our own minds - they should have done that five days ago, but didn't. Why not? Assad isn't the only one who isn't being transparent.

[karynnj]

43. Let's assume that your scenario is correct - and let's look at the Obama administration's and

Assad's actions.

1) The US has their intercept and know it was a Syrian regime person involved.
2) Syria lied and said it didn't happen, then said the rebels did it, all the while bombing the area for 5 days. ( This area had hundreds perhaps a thousand deaths. Imagine the grief, panic, confusion and turmoil. This is THEIR country. Their reaction is to bomb the area for 5 days!)
3) NO public statement is made condemning the action and calling out the rogue officer.

If Assad were not involved in the attack this is stunningly weird - not to mention callus on his part. Is this remotely likely to have been the response of an innocent head of state? Would a US President cover for someone who did this in America?

[leveymg]

48. Why has the WH sat on these tapes for five or more days? Why haven't they been released?

I think those are the questions we need to be asking and we need to see and consider the evidence -- all of the evidence -- before the US launches the first missile.

[karynnj]

53. I hope that they get a coherent case for the use and the blame out before there is any attack

It may be that it takes longer to put together that complete case that they need to show and they thought that they needed to quickly respond to a huge chemical attack. Imagine if they did NOT respond to that. Would you have wanted the Republicans having that lack of response?

[JDPriestly]

65. Do you have links for your statements?

[Ghost Dog]

70. Wishful thinking. It was our 'special ops',

and, in your heart, you know it.

(just mho).

[karynnj]

73. No I don't "know" that - nor do you

There is NO reason to think that. Obama, Dempsey, Hagel and Kerry have ALL been reluctant to do anything militarily - or even give weapons. With the smaller attacks, they were able to use language to get around Obama's "red line" comment - avoiding getting more involved.

[arewenotdemo]

97. It's also possible that whoever ordered it, did so to bring down the regime.

And I certainly don't trust the U.S. to not be behind it.

[MyNameGoesHere]

11. Quick somebody send Kerry up to the UN with photos of those

mobile gas lab a thingys. I am sure Colin can get you a copy. I am tired of waiting, it's murdering time! My member is rock hard waiting in anticipation of the shock and awe. ohh ahhhh come on MOAB! ahhhhhhh.

[another_liberal]

20. Ouch!

Great big one.

[GeorgeGist]

12. He's the DECIDER.

[Hydra]

22. *Sizzle*

That's going to leave a mark.

[frylock]

28. 50 tons of mustard gas on a turkey farm

fuck this shit.

[michigandem58]

32. I believe him, without reservation

I trust him.

If you don't favor military action, fine. But don't make up your own facts or deny them as they develop.

[Autumn]

35. Which facts were made up in the OP?

[avaistheone1]

40. WTF

He has already told us we can not believe him..."NSA does not spy on us"

[Autumn]

50. Maybe he is confused and thinks Obama is making up facts.

"We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out," Obama said during an interview with PBS' NewsHour. "And if that's so, then there need to be international consequences." That was what Obama said.

That was all the OP quoted.

[Ghost Dog]

71. "international consequences": eg. Brit warships to the fore...

¿?



("Culture, Travel, Life, Women, Fashion..." Mmmmmmm. )

[daleo]

80. "we have concluded" and

"If that's so"

That doesn't sound like someone who is convinced in his own mind.

[alarimer]

45. They are hungry for blood and it doesn't seem to matter whose.

The problem is, both sides in this mess SUCK. You got terrorists on one side and a dictator on the other. A pox on all their houses, I say.

I fail to understand why this is our problem to solve.

Another warmonger in chief.

[CrispyQ]

75. A Nobel Peace prize winning warmonger in chief.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

47. Say we hit one of their depots and kill an Iranian or Russian national. Oops, sorry?

[Martak Sarno]

55. Out with the old...in with the new!

Isn't it just so curious that we're on the verge of getting out of Afghanistan (2014) as Obama promised a while back (was it 2012 or 2013...or whenever). But he never said we'd be out of a war, just out of Afghanistan. Looks like we're just shifting the chickenhawks playing field somewhat. More political semantics, eh?

So the Obots can say he kept at least one of his few "words/promises" about getting out of Afghanistan so we can now turn the Corporate Wehrmacht to Syria. Gotta keep those military and CEOs happy and in the black.

And about that "evidence"...the transparency of this administration has become even more opaque...almost like an iron curtain between the White House and the Public, no?

I just wonder how many more American soldiers will have to die to satisfy the killing lust of the current politicians. Bush/Cheney evidently could live with their deaths. Can Obama live with even more?

By the way, as far as the Libertarian/Democrat thing on DU goes, Keith Olbermann was on Craig Ferguson a couple weeks ago. Craig asked Keith if he were a Democrat. Olbermann replied that he is a Liberal not a Democrat.

I, too, feel the term Democrat no longer applies to me either as it once did; no longer stands for what it used to. I like the word Liberal as a more apt description. At least of how I feel.

[obama2terms]

61. Honestly I would feel bad for any president in this situation republican or democrat

It's a tough decision to make, a really tough one. The problem is, both sides seem to be pretty bad in this war. They may be fighting for different things, but the violence is the same. Even if some group manages to oust Assad, he'll probably be replaced with someone crazier or about the same level of craziness. There's no winners in this, and if we enter a war with them, we'll be losers too. We've been in a war for over a decade, it's time to take a break. Us entering the war won't really change anything, it'll just mean more dead soldiers, more debt, and more damage to our already unstable economy.

[davidpdx]

62. Syria says it was the US, Britain and others that helped the rebels

By no means do I believe this.

[jsr]

63. Assad also took babies out of incubators

according to reliable witnesses.

[jzodda]

64. You are all very disappointing to me

Basically much of this thread is spent calling President Obama a man who lies. Comparing him to bush and the Neo-cons. Or comparing those around him to the neo-cons.

After all we have been through with this President. You want to disagree (even though nothing has happened as of yet) fine.

To insinuate on DU of all places that Obama would lie to the people is beyond the pale.

[daleo]

81. I want to see convincing evidence

Military action will kill innocent people. Before taking that step we need evidence, public evidence, not just faith in leadership. Democracy is a heavy responsibility for everyone, not just leaders.

[Ash_F]

66. I'll wait for a full and detailed report, thanks.

When I was in school, my teacher told me I had to show my work. So let's see it.

[truth2power]

76. Weasel words...always. But some will never learn..

because, for them, it's Party over principle. And Party over conscience. And Party over common sense.

[Bragi]

77. "And if that's so, then..."

This really does suggest that the President doesn't fully believe what he stated categorically in the previous sentence.

Sometimes people are betrayed by our own words. I think this may be such a case.

[daleo]

79. Let's see the evidence

I said it when Bush was in office and I will say it now.