Just about everything in the news since late August is about the Obama administration plan to carry out an air attack on the Assad government forces in Syria for his alleged use of chemical weapons. Unless there is a terrorist attack on America, the Syrian affair will dominate the news for the entire month whether the U.S. attack is actually carried out or not.<\/p>\n
The overwhelming majority of the American people do not want any U.S. attack on Syria. Most Americans are fed up with us intervening in Muslim nations and think we should stay out of the Syrian civil war. That does not mean that we will. Obama has put America between a rock and a hard place by accusing Assad of using nerve gas and saying because of that we will bomb his forces. If the U.S. does not now carry out the attack, America will look weak to bully rogue nations like Iran and North Korea and not acting will also disillusion allied nations like Israel, South Korea, and Japan that are under threat, and are counting on America to take action when rogue nations do cross the red lines that America set.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, if America does carry out the attack, and if our Intelligence is later proven wrong, America will lose any remaining credibility that it has left in the world. And if America kills many innocent civilians as a result of the attack, some leaders in this nation could be called war criminals and America would become more hated and isolated.<\/p>\n
Obama should never have put himself in this spot, but what-goes around-comes-around. The same people who were protesting\u00a0 America’s military intervention in Vietnam and Iraq are now in leadership and they are getting us into a no win war of their very own making. They intend to use America’s military to help the Sunni fight the Shia Muslims. I talked about Syria and this developing regional war between the Sunni and Shia Muslims in my last article, so I will spare you those details again.<\/p>\n
The questions now are: will Obama get the congressional authorization to carry out this attack on Syria; and if not, will Obama attack Syria anyway? As of this writing, it looks like Obama may have the votes in the Senate to pass the resolution but the votes are not there in the House.<\/p>\n
Obama is planning to take his case directly to the America people in a TV speech to the nation on Sept 10th. However, some are saying it will be too little too late to change enough votes in the House. I would not be so sure that it will play out that way. The House probably will not vote for at least two weeks on this resolution and by that time many things could happen that would change views and votes.<\/p>\n
For example, last year on the 9\/11 anniversary terrorists attacked our consulate in Benghazi and killed four Americans. If there was an attack on this nation or an ally on 9\/11 or on any date before the House vote, and the attack could seemingly be tied to Syria, Hezbollah, or Iran, it could change the whole equation of support. Other possibilities, are that there will be another alleged gas attack or that convincing smoking gun evidence will be presented.<\/p>\n
Speaking about 9\/11, the plan as of this writing is for the Senate to vote on the bombing resolution on 9\/11. Twelve years ago on 9\/11 Al Qaeda brought down the twin towers that killed over 3000 Americans. Now on 9\/11, the Senate may vote to bomb and that action could help Al Qaeda take over Syria. Ain’t that freaky? Any Harbinger fans see any hidden message in that? And just in time for Halloween.<\/p>\n
If Obama does not get the votes in Congress, for an attack he has other options. He could attack Syria anyway and risk the consequences of getting impeached and removed from office, especially if America gets dragged into a wider war, or if the attack does not go well and kills a lot of civilians. Obama also could say that he will wait for the U.N. investigation to be completed to get international support.<\/p>\n
That would be the smart move because even Putin said he would back the removal of Assad if solid evidence is presented in the U.N. that proves that Assad carried out the nerve gas attack. In that case, an attack might not even be necessary because if Russia told Assad to step down, Assad probably would see little alternative.<\/p>\n
Obama also could say that Congress has spoken and is now to blame for whatever happens in the area and just wash his hands of the whole matter and hope to use any negative fallout for the spot he put us in against the Republicans in the 2014 election.<\/p>\n
What will Obama actually do? I don’t have a clue, and at this point I am not sure that Obama has a clue either. After the box he put himself in with his own words, I don’t think world leaders are going to be drawing red lines much anymore.<\/p>\n
If America does attack Syria, there could be unforeseen consequences to America. A cyber attack that can bring down our electrical grid and infrastructure is not totally out of the question. Even the departing head of Homeland Security has warned us that it is not a matter of if this attack happens, it is just a matter of when. I also wrote an article on that cyber threat danger<\/a>. We have been very careless in this country and we are very vulnerable to enemies using cyber warfare.<\/p>\n ——————————————————————————————————————————————-<\/p>\n With this military action looming, all the prior Obama administration scandals are now pretty much lost in space. By the time this crises is resolved, if not before, we will have a budget crises. The government will be totally out of money by the middle of October if Congress does not increase the national debt limit. For a couple of months now, our government has been “borrowing” from every fund they know of to keep paying the bills. That is why the national debt clock has not moved in months. Once the debt ceiling is raised the national debt will suddenly jump to over $17 trillion.<\/p>\n The economy and the employment figures as told by our government remains deceptive. The government says that unemployment fell to 7.3 percent but that falling rate is only because more people continue to be removed from the work force. The percent of people in the work force is now the lowest that it has been in 35 years. Almost ten million people have left the workforce since Obama became President. Unbelievable.<\/p>\n I remember when one wage earner could make enough to support a family, but today half the families in the U.S. need two wage earners just to stay above the national poverty level. However, for many families these days there is only one parent. That is why the number of people below the poverty level keep rising along with the numbers of people on food stamp rolls. Most single parents are getting financial aid and many married couples do not see the point in both of them working low paying jobs when both working would just cut off their government aid but not improve their standard of living.<\/p>\n I guess the Feds will have to keep their house-of-cards printing machine going because the economy is not improving for most.\u00a0 The very rich are getting much richer, the middle class is losing ground, and the poor are getting poorer under Obama’s “spreading the wealth around” administration. Next up, will be increasing inflation. Then there will be more lying about the data and more downward adjustments to any cost of living increases to make everyone but the rich poorer.<\/p>\n