President Obama SHALL NOT be Mocked When His Red Line is Crossed.

A “racist” rodeo clown was bad enough. Now, President Obama has apparently decided not to be mocked by Syria, et al.

Bryan Preston at PJ Tatler posted an article on August twenty-eighth titled Obama’s Strikes on Syria to be Just Muscular Enough Not to be Mocked. That appears to be what is intended, and His great sensitivity to world opinion is overwhelming, underwhelming, or something. But perhaps there is a high handed minded purpose. According to Andrew Klavan at PJ Media,

The good thing is that this is a military action with a clearly defined purpose: to distract us from the ineptitude and corruption of the Obama administration. In order to achieve this goal, a contained and restricted action should suffice, requiring little more than the meaningless scattershot dropping of bombs, followed by a presidential speech about poison gas featuring a Very Serious Expression. The word “barbaric” and the phrase “will not be tolerated” should only be deployed if absolutely necessary, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. The sides are clearly drawn: on one we have the murderous tyrant Bashar al-Assad, and on the other, we have al-Qaeda, and really, you just couldn’t ask for a nicer bunch of people. So, looking on the bright side, at least we’re unlikely to miss hitting our enemies.  I remember when the media and the left excoriated George W. Bush for “going it alone” and “rushing to war” in Iraq even though he waited for more than a year and solicited the support of our allies and the UN. I’m glad to say Obama will not be distracted by that sort of background noise. It’s much easier to make these decisions by yourself in a big hurry when it’s nice and quiet.

Beyond that, according to Barry Rubin at the same link, the apparently intended attack will do bupkis that’s worthwhile (he did not use that Yiddish word, but that’s essentially his view).

What is the plan of the Obama Administration in Syria? At the moment, it appears to be to do something of very short duration that seems fearless but not really frightening. That will not be as easy as was accepting His Nobel Peace Prize. Despite even the best laid plans to kiss hit and then quickly run to hide, whether we, Israel and our other allies will get to run and hide will not be entirely up to us. Iran and her close associates in the Middle East, including Syria, may well block the path.

As observed at Maggie’s Notebook,

Will someone please tell me why are we getting involved in a civil war?  Have we not learned from past experience (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) that we cannot defeat a military using conventional military tactics and Obama’s idea of rules of engagement.  Rules written to give the enemy every advantage. All I can see if we attack Syria is that we support al-Queda and enter into a war we cannot extract ourselves from for years.  A war that will cost the US thousands of lives and billions of dollars.

resetThe Obama Administration has concluded that the United Nations Security Council will not go along with its plans — those damn Russian obstructionists are as bad as Republicans! When they got the memo about His Transformational Reset they must have giggled.

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK — The United States, Britain and France will proceed with action in Syria without approval from the United Nations, the US said on Wednesday, after a short but tense afternoon brought NATO allies in direct conflict with Russian obstruction over how to respond to the mass use of chemical weapons. . . . . The US now “does not see an avenue forward” through the Security Council, State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said on Wednesday after the meeting adjourned. “We are not proceeding with a vote on this draft resolution.” “We are making our own decisions on our own timeline,” Harf added. “The Russians have been clear that they have no interest in holding the Syrian regime accountable.”

So, we will proceed in Syria anyway, although we do not yet know exactly what we will try to do or whether things might — “unexpectedly” — spin out of control.

NBC News reported on Wednesday that the US had “passed the point of no return” on a Syria strike, quoting a senior American official. But officials in Washington and London have also cautioned that what form a response to Syria would take had still not been decided. [Emphasis added.]

Whoops. Belay that. Britain seems to want more time and evidence.

Britain believes that the UN Security Council should see findings from chemical weapons inspectors before backing any military action in Syria, according to a copy of the motion to be placed before the UK parliament released on Wednesday. “The United Nations Security Council must have the opportunity immediately to consider that briefing and that every effort should be made to secure a Security Council Resolution backing military action before any such action is taken,” the motion, to be debated on Thursday, reads. . . . . UN chief Ban Ki-moon pleaded for more time for diplomacy and to allow UN investigators to complete their work. The experts, wearing flak jackets and helmets, collected blood and urine samples from victims during a visit to at least one of the areas hit in last week’s attack.

The Labor Party in Britain has broken with Prime Minister Cameron.

Labour toughened its stance against UK military action only a day after Ed Miliband signalled that the Opposition was likely to support Mr Cameron. Tonight it demanded six concessions as the price of supporting him tomorrow night – including a UN Security Council vote on the inspectors’ report; a further report to the Commons and a second vote before Britain takes part in any military action; “compelling evidence” that the Assad regime was responsible for last week’s attack and a “clear basis in international law” for intervention. . . . . Although Labour claimed Mr Cameron had backed down, it refused to withdraw its threat to oppose the Government tomorrow night. More than 80 Tory MPs have already signalled their anxiety about intervention in Syria.

Might cynical obstructionist developments of that sort be a bit mocking for the Obama Administration? Where, oh where, is their trust? He may release evidence today (August twenty-ninth) as to who did what to whom. Will it be credited and if so by whom? I don’t know. But don’t worry. President Obama’s Islamist relations are just peachy.

To date, US President Barack Obama’s efforts to appease or engage Islamists have either failed or backfired. US influence in the Middle East is at an all-time low and Islamic fundamentalism continues to gain strength at an alarming pace. [Emphasis added.]

Failure? For President Obama, that appears to be a feature rather than a bug.

Russia seems to be quite unhappy with the manner in which events are unfolding and may even do something nasty outside the United Nations. According to this article at EU Times,

A grim “urgent action memorandum” issued today from the office of President Putin to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is ordering a “massive military strike” against Saudi Arabia in the event that the West attacks Syria. According to Kremlin sources familiar with this extraordinary “war order,” Putin became “enraged” after his early August meeting with Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan who warned that if Russia did not accept the defeat of Syria, Saudi Arabia would unleash Chechen terrorists under their control to cause mass death and chaos during the Winter Olympics scheduled to be held 7-23 February 2014 in Sochi, Russia. Lebanese newspaper As-Safir confirmed this amazing threat against Russia saying that Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord by stating: “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us.”

True? I don’t know, but what difference could it make? Clinton testifies Since it’s off somewhere in the future and beyond the current news cycle, none whatever. War is unpleasant; people can be killed and things can get broken. But don’t be concerned. This time, they will only be playing leapfrog.

When “we” go to war in Syria, everyone will happily trip along trying to keep in step. Except for those who don’t.

According to Newt Gingrich, with whom I disagree on many things,

Doing something that feels good isn’t the same as doing something good. Unless the United States and its allies are prepared to do a lot more than simply fire missiles at a distance, nothing positive will come from this adventure. The time has come for a complete rethinking of our strategy in the Middle East. Avoiding a military engagement in Syria is an important first step toward rethinking what we are doing. A final note: Secretary of State John Kerry’s effort this week to “shame” the Russian government is embarrassingly naive. Putin was a senior KGB officer. He can’t be shamed. The Russians killed thousands of Chechens in their war to crush radical Islamists (the people who bombed Boston last spring). Syria under the Assads has been a Russian ally for decades. It is sad to watch Americans ignore this history and posture on the world stage. It is also dangerous.

Here, former Speaker Gingrich’s views and mine are similar. Evidently, eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons inventory would be impossible because they are widely scattered and even attempting it would likely release poison gas and kill many “innocent civilians” — many of them Islamists who hate us — and He can’t have that. Should Assad go or be killed, they would most likely take over and focus on killing us. Evidently, based on His actions in Egypt, that’s what they should do, hence bringing peace and tranquility to the entire Middle East — if Israel would simply disappear from the face of the Earth as she should.

Understandably, Israel may be reluctant to leave to please Secretary Kerry or even President Obama.

President Obama set Himself — and “our” Republic — up to be mocked when He announced His “red line” on the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria. Although the U.N. team has not finished investigating what happened and who did it, He claims to be certain that it was Assad’s people. More here and here. What we all know, of course, is that the transparent Obama Administration would never — no, never; well, hardly ever — tell we the peasants anything less than truthful. After all, He Himself has said it and it’s greatly to His credit.

So, clearly the chemical attack on pitiful civilians was made by the horrid Assad regime. “In the entire annals of our history there is absolutely no circumstance so entirely free from all manner of doubt of any kind whatever!”

Verses from Gilbert and Sullivan’s Gondoliers come to mind: A pretty good video of the entire performance is on YouTube and the relevant part, about two minutes long, begins at approximately the forty-two minute position.

In the text below, I have excluded the chorus which simply repeats what others sang or said.

DUKE. My child, allow me to present to you His Distinction Don Alhambra del Bolero, the Grand Inquisitor of Spain. It was His Distinction who so thoughtfully abstracted your infant husband and brought him to Venice.

DUCH. Unfortunately, if I am not mistaken, there appears to be some little doubt as to His Majesty’s whereabouts. CAS. (aside). A doubt as to his whereabouts? Then we may yet be saved!

DON AL. A doubt? Oh dear, no—no doubt at all! He is here, in Venice, plying the modest but picturesque calling of a gondolier. I can give you his address—I see him every day! Listen, and I’ll tell you all about it. In the entire annals of our history there is absolutely no circumstance so entirely free from all manner of doubt of any kind whatever! Listen, and I’ll tell you all about it. [Emphasis added.]

I stole the Prince, and I brought him here, And left him gaily prattling With a highly respectable gondolier,Who promised the Royal babe to rear, And teach him the trade of a timoneer With his own beloved bratling.

Both of the babes were strong and stout, And, considering all things, clever. Of that there is no manner of doubt— No probable, possible shadow of doubt— No possible doubt whatever.

But owing, I’m much disposed to fear, To his terrible taste for tippling, That highly respectable gondolier Could never declare with a mind sincere Which of the two was his offspring dear, And which the Royal stripling!

CAS. Then do you mean to say that I am married to one of two gondoliers, but it is impossible to say which?

DON AL. Without any doubt of any kind whatever. But be reassured: the nurse to whom your husband was entrusted is the mother of the musical young man who is such a past-master of that delicately modulated instrument (indicating the drum). She can, no doubt, establish the King’s identity beyond all question.

LUIZ. Heavens, how did he know that?

DON AL. My young friend, a Grand Inquisitor is always up to date. (To Cas.) His mother is at present the wife of a highly respectable and old-established brigand, who carries on an extensive practice in the mountains around Cordova. Accompanied by two of my emissaries, he will set off at once for his mother’s address. She will return with them, and if she finds any difficulty in making up her mind, the persuasive influence of the torture chamber will jog her memory.

“Unexpectedly,” it turned out that neither of the two young gondoliers was the king and that Luiz (he and Casilda were madly in love) was the king. His mother, to whom the two had been entrusted, had switched things around.

Articles have been written strongly suggesting that the use of chemical weapons, which prompted President Obama to announce that the Assad regime had crossed His red line, were instead used in a false flag operation by the Syrian “freedom fighters.” The Syrian government has complained that regime forces were gassed by insurgents. True or false? Yes, one or the other. “In the entire annals of our history there is absolutely no circumstance so entirely free from all manner of doubt of any kind whatever!”

Syria’s UN envoy said Wednesday that dozens of Syrian soldiers inhaled poison gas in new incidents in his country and called on theUnited Nations to investigate. Ambassador Bashar Jaafari told reporters he had asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to extend the mandate of a UN chemical weapons team now in Syria to include the “heinous” new incidents. He said “dozens” of Syrian soldiers were being treated in hospitals after the incidents on August 22, 24 and 25 in the Damascus suburbs. Jaafari gave no other details.

Many if not most are terrorists engage in workplace violence and might well do that sort of thing. They have been losing and seem to be desperate for further assistance. They seem about to get some — not enough to make them like or even tolerate us, but perhaps, temporarily, enough so that they may not mock Him too severely.


Applejack for President! The poor chap is long dead and can’t make decisions. That’s a plus compared to the President Obama and the current principal Democrat contender, former Secretary Clinton. Perhaps as many dead people as voted for President Obama will vote for Applejack.


According to an article at The Daily Pest Beast,

The Obama administration has refused to send gas masks and other chemical-weapons protection gear to Syrian opposition groups, despite numerous requests dating back more than a year and until the reported chemical-weapons attack that struck the Damascus suburbs August 21.

. . . .

One former Obama-administration official said the national-security staff reviewed a list of nonlethal humanitarian and medical aid that the U.S. could provide to opposition groups more than a year ago and ruled out providing gas masks, though thousands sit in Defense Department warehouses all over the region, left over from the war in Iraq.

“There are a lot of gas-mask kits in excess supply. It was not an issue of availability,” the former official said. “In the early days of the Syria conflict, even the smallest amount of aid to the Free Syrian Army was viewed with great concern. It was a lack of foresight by administration bureaucrats. Unfortunately, now we’re seeing the consequences.”

A senior Obama administration official confirmed to The Daily Beast on Wednesday that the White House did review the issue last year and determined it wouldn’t provide any gas masks or other chemical-weapons protective gear to the Syria opposition because of fears the equipment could get into the wrong hands.

“The provision of protective gear for the opposition sounds like an easy idea, but we need consider the potential for misuse as well,” the official said. “Such equipment requires proper training to be effective, and we need to be careful about how and to whom we provide it.”

Now why, Oh Why, did the humanitarian and otherwise benign Obama Administration refuse gas masks to the “innocent civilians” of Syria? They might have got into the “wrong hands?” Which are the correct hands? Whichever they might be, it would have meant taking a small and little noticed humanitarian stand against the horrid Assad regime and its allegedly murderous inclinations.

Now, He wants – if He can garner what He apparently deems the necessary international support – to try to take what might be considered a bold, courageous and highly visible stand. Why on Earth should He have bothered to take a minor humanitarian stand when, if things worked out and a clear “red line” were to be crossed, He could try to appear to take a brave and forceful stand against the forces of evil?

This might be the, or at least an, answer: back then, there was not an adequate real crisis of which to take advantage. Now there is one, largely of His own creation, so He has a grand opportunity to take advantage of it.

What an heroic little President!

Another UPDATE:

Today, the British Parliament preliminarily rejected military action in Syria.


British lawmakers on Thursday rejected a measure that would have given preliminary approval to military intervention in Syria, in a major setback for both British Prime Minister David Cameron and the Obama administration.

Cameron, who had been pushing for military action in response to an alleged chemical weapons strike last week, indicated after the vote that he would abide by the outcome. The measure was narrowly defeated, by 285 votes to 272 votes.

The outcome raises serious questions for President Obama, who has not yet made a decision on the way forward in Syria but had indicated his administration would need international support for any strike. After failing to win support for an anti-Assad resolution before the U.N. Security Council, U.S. officials were looking to allies like Britain and France to build a coalition for action in Syria.

Oh dear! What happens next, if He reveals, fully and candidly, His bases for intervention? How could anyone with a functioning mind deny His demands before then? Isn’t He the King of the World, or something


President Obama, our Dear Leader, has said that if other nations don’t cooperate with Him, the United States will take on Syria alone.

(WASHINGTON) — The White House says President Barack Obama’s decision on a possible military strike against Syria will be guided by America’s best interests, suggesting the U.S. may act alone if other nations won’t help. [Emphasis added.]

National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said Thursday that Obama believes there are core U.S. interests at stake in Syria. She said countries who violate international norms about chemical weapons must be held accountable.

The White House was responding to a failed vote in Britain’s Parliament on Thursday to endorse military action against Syria over an alleged chemical weapons attack near Damascus last week. That means Britain won’t play a direct role in any U.S. attack.

What a brave, big President He is! When will He tell us what America’s “core interests” are and whether — and if so how — they differ from His? Does He plan personally to go to Syria and fight for us?

About danmillerinpanama

I was graduated from Yale University in 1963 with a B.A. in economics and from the University of Virginia School of law, where I was the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review in 1966. Following four years of active duty with the Army JAG Corps, with two tours in Korea, I entered private practice in Washington, D.C. specializing in communications law. I retired in 1996 to sail with my wife, Jeanie, on our sailboat Namaste to and in the Caribbean. In 2002, we settled in the Republic of Panama and live in a very rural area up in the mountains. I have contributed to Pajamas Media and Pajamas Tatler. In addition to my own blog, Dan Miller in Panama, I an an editor of Warsclerotic and contribute to China Daily Mail when I have something to write about North Korea.
This entry was posted in Andrew Klavan, Barry Rubin, Brutality, Bupkis, Chemical weapons, Dead People, Freedom, Gingrich, Iran, Islamists, Israel, John Kerry, Middle East, Military, Muslim Brotherhood, Netanyahu, Nuclear weapons, Obama, Politics, Regime change, Russia, Trust, U.S. Military, United States and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to President Obama SHALL NOT be Mocked When His Red Line is Crossed.

  1. Pingback: The Great Iranian Charmin Offensive, Obama, Rouhani and The Bomb | danmillerinpanama

  2. Pingback: Do the United States of Obama even have a Foreign Policy? | danmillerinpanama

  3. Bill Clinton was right back in 2008 when he called Obama an amateur. Now, if he doesn’t give Assad a spanking for crossing his red line, why should Iran worry about crossing Obama’s other red line? What’s a poor puppet with so many puppet masters to do?

  4. Andrew says:

    If for any reason you are not prepared to intervene in Syria; their will will a huge humanity ramifications in the long term so mister president it’s up to you now to decide if you are to take decisive action. Next time you make a mockery of me and Kim beware because Kim and I have advanced with the iPS systems.

  5. Andrew says:

    OK I Andrew REPolusk give America authorities to carry out deployment of troops to investigate the ongoing issues in Syria. If you use force and it spills into another country you will be liable for any counter actions that another military agencies may take in a result of further escillaion. Basically I give authorities to disassemble Bashar Al Assad and relieve him from his duties. I have discussed this issues with Marster Kim Jong UN and as long as my criteria is maintained for the interest for Humanity are kept and be bounded by our constitution.

    I therefore give namingly America authorities to use any means of force and action on Syrian lead people.
    I have concluded that man must be protected from anything that is known to be invasive on human beings. I deeply am hurt that you guys can’t figure out another way to resolve the situation in that country. But my personal opinion on this matter is that decisive military action is required on your behalf.
    Maintaining a capitalist systems require decisive decisions that my result in conflict/s and can be unattractive to neighboring countries. Please take all necessary precautions entering Syria and it’s allies.

  6. Tom Carter says:

    I don’t understand what the U.S. national interest is in taking sides in Syria, even if we use force against what appears to be the least evil of the participants. Worse, it seems the Administration has no idea what will happen or what the U.S. should do after we beat up on … somebody … for a few days. I don’t see any way this could turn out well.

    There is the idea that there’s an ethical imperative in international affairs — if we have the power to prevent or stop evil acts, we should do so, regardless of questions of national interest. When Clinton apologized for failing to use U.S. military power to stop the genocide in Rwanda, he revealed an apparent belief in that ethical imperative. The question becomes, where do we stop? There is not, and never will be, a shortage of places where primitive people are busily hacking each other to pieces. Do we intervene everywhere? Of course not. That leaves us at the same place as before — use military force only where significant U.S. interests are involved. In other cases, let the Foggy Bottom poofs jaw at their opposite numbers, throw around a bit of foreign aid, and keep your sword in its scabbard until serious work is needed.

    One other thought: If Iran, from it’s own soil, or it’s proxies in Syria attack Israel as they have threatened to do, all hell is going to break loose. Is the Obama Administration ready for that? Have they even thought seriously about it?

  7. Tammy Terrell says:

    BO is an enemy of Israel and a friend of the muslim brotherhood. Therefore, nothing good will come of anything he does. He is now cursed by God and won’t survive it for long. Israel will still be standing when all of the rest of the middle east is in flames. BO is actively involving the US in that inferno and if we aren’t careful, by siding with the enemies of Israel, we will find God shall NOT be mocked EVER.

  8. Brittius says:

    Reblogged this on and commented:
    There will be NO unauthorized Mocking!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s