"Who asked Mr. Obama to be the bully of the world?": Everybody will lose control of the situation when the powder keg blows. There is a risk of a regional war

شام پر حملے کے لیے امریکی فوج کرائے پر مانگا لی۔ سعودی عرب بھئی واہ حدہوگئی بادشاہت کی کرسی بچانے کی خاطر مسلمان ملک دوسرے مسلمان ملک کو مارنے یہود و نصاری کو پیسہ دینگے ۔۔۔ قطر امارات متحدہ اور سعودی خاندان۔۔اللہ کی لاٹھی بے آواز ہوتی ہے شام کے خلاف جنگ کی صورت میں کون کون سے ہتھیاروں کا استعمال ہو گا. Wed, Sep 04 12:42 PM EDT image 1 of 12 By Khaled Yacoub Oweis and Amena Bakr AMMAN/DOHA (Reuters) - President Bashar al-Assad's former defense minister has fled Syria, opposition figures said on Wednesday, noting that General Ali Habib was the most senior of Assad's Alawite sect to defect. Habib had been under house arrest since resigning in protest at Assad's crackdown on demonstrators in 2011 but had managed to reach the Turkish border late on Tuesday with Western help, Kamal al-Labwani of the Syrian National Coalition told Reuters. Other sources also said Habib had fled but Syrian state television denied he had left his home and Turkey's foreign minister said he could not confirm the general had defected. More verbal skirmishing on Wednesday between Moscow and Washington over U.S. plans to attack Damascus was tempered by talk of possible easing in the East-West deadlock when President Vladimir Putin hosts world leaders at a G20 summit on Thursday. U.S. President Barack Obama said he would continue to try and persuade Putin of the need for punitive strikes on Assad for using chemical weapons when the two meet in St. Petersburg. But Putin again questioned Western evidence. And he accused U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry outright of "lying" when, in urging Congress to approve strikes on Syria, Kerry played down the role of al Qaeda in the rebel forces. "Al Qaeda units are the main military echelon, and they know this," Putin said. "He is lying and knows he is lying. It's sad." Having surprised friends and foes alike by seeking approval from Congress before attacking, Obama has been building support ahead of votes in Washington expected next week. In Stockholm en route for Russia, he appealed to lawmakers' consciences:

"America and Congress's credibility is on the line," he said. "The question is how credible is Congress when it passes a treaty saying we have to forbid the use of chemical weapons."

Earlier, Putin had said in a pre-summit interview with the Associated Press that he could not absolutely "rule out" Russia supporting a U.N. Security Council resolution to punish Assad - if it could be proved he had used poison gas. A senior Western official said that, while Moscow was unlikely to say so in public, there were signs Russian officials believe Assad was indeed responsible for the deaths on August 21 and that it had strained Russian support for him - providing an opening for a new, concerted drive to end the conflict. However, Putin's characteristically blunt tone towards the U.S. position appeared to limit prospects for a breakthrough in a stalemate that has prevented international action to rein in a conflict that has killed more than 100,000 Syrians and left millions homeless but which neither side has been able to win. "DEFECTION" The rebels, largely drawn from Syria's Sunni Muslim majority, have captured large swathes of territory and won backing from Gulf Arab states like Saudi Arabia, as well as from Turkey and Western powers. But Assad, armed by Moscow and backed by Shi'ite Muslim Iran, has held on in Damascus and elsewhere. Christians, Kurds and others, as well as Western leaders, are wary of Islamist militants among the rebels. Assad's fellow Alawites, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam, fear annihilation if he loses and provide the backbone of the president's armed forces. Numerous defections over the past two years by senior commanders, either to the rebel Free Syrian Army or into exile abroad, have not led to a collapse of Assad's defenses. But the flight of Habib, if confirmed, would lend credibility to suggestions that parts of the Alawite community may be turning against Assad. Previous high-level defections have generally involved Sunni officers. "Ali Habib has managed to escape from the grip of the regime and he is now in Turkey, but this does not mean that he has joined the opposition. I was told this by a Western diplomatic official," the SNC's Kamal al-Labwani said from Paris. A Gulf source told Reuters that Habib had crossed the Turkish frontier late on Tuesday with two or three other people. He was then taken across the border in a convoy of vehicles. Born in 1939, Habib was defense minister from June 2009 to August 2011 and has also served as Chief of the General Staff of the Syrian Army. He is from the port city of Tartus. Some opposition sources say that Habib disagreed with the use of force against protesters at the start of the revolt in 2011. Those sources say he was dismissed. He later said publicly that he had left the post for health reasons. "Habib is a simple and honest. Unlike the Assads he is not corrupt," said a military defector who served under Habib. "His defection will rattle the Alawite community because it will be seen as another man jumping off a sinking boat, indicating the coming fall of the regime." Predictions of the imminent collapse of the four-decade-old Assad dynasty, including by Western leaders, have turned out to be wishful thinking before. Recently, the alleged use of poison gas has been cited as evidence of desperation in the Assad camp. The head of German intelligence told members of parliament this week that German agents had recorded a call between the Iranian embassy in Damascus and a senior figure in Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shi'ite militia, which, the agents believe, betrayed a lack of confidence among these two key Assad allies. A person who attended at the lawmakers' briefing on Monday said the material was presented as evidence of Assad's role in the release of poison gas in rebel-held suburbs of Damascus on August 21. But it also indicated doubts about Assad's tactics. The Hezbollah official said Assad's was wrong to order the gas attack and that it indicated he was losing his nerve. Germany has ruled out joining any military action in Syria. MILITARY PLANS Following the failure of British Prime Minister David Cameron to win parliamentary backing for air strikes last week, France is the only major military power lining up behind Obama. Its parliament debated Syria on Wednesday, though President Francois Hollande does not need approval for action. His foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, said using force against Assad could pave the way for a new round of diplomacy. French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault told parliament that failure to strike Assad would send a message to the likes of Iran and North Korea that they could defy Western powers with impunity, notably over concerns about their nuclear programs. Obama has won the backing of key figures in the U.S. Congress, including among his Republican opponents. Leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said they reached an agreement on a draft authorization for the use of military force in Syria. However, the draft is narrower than the request made by Obama and includes a provision barring the use of ground troops. Some senators have criticized the wording. Among other provisions, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee draft, which was obtained by Reuters, sets a 60-day limit on U.S. military action in Syria, with a possibility of a single 30-day extension subject to conditions. It requires Obama to consult with Congress and submit to the Senate and House of Representatives foreign relations panel a strategy for negotiating a political settlement to the conflict, including a review of all forms of assistance to the rebels. (Additional reporting by Laila Bassam, Yara Bayoumy and Erika Solomon in Beirut, Paul Taylor and John Irish in Paris, Alexandra Hudson in Berlin, Thomas Grove and Darya Korsunskaya in Moscow and Steve Holland and Matt Spetalnick in Stockholm; Writing by Alastair Macdonald; Editing by Giles Elgood) ==================== Exclusive: Defecting Assad ally reaches Istanbul Thu, Sep 05 13:53 PM EDT image By Amena Bakr and Khaled Yacoub Oweis DOHA/AMMAN (Reuters) - Bashar al-Assad's former defense minister has reached Istanbul after a defection that betrays cracks in the president's support among his own Alawite sect, opposition and diplomatic sources said on Thursday. Dismissing a cursory Syrian state television denial of the first Reuters report that General Ali Habib had been spirited across the Turkish frontier this week, opposition figures said Habib was likely to keep a low profile after evading house arrest and reaching Turkey with the aid of Western agents. One prominent opposition figure also spoke of speculation that Habib, who is in his 70s and apparently broke with Assad after a crackdown on protesters in 2011, might be lined up by U.S. and Russian officials for a role in transitional arrangements to negotiate an end to the civil war. "My information, based on a trusted Western source, is that he is in Istanbul," veteran dissident Kamal al-Labwani, now based in Paris, told Reuters on Thursday. "Habib exited with Western intelligence involvement, so do not expect public statements by security operatives on his whereabouts." A source in one of the Gulf Arab states that is backing the revolt against Assad said Habib had crossed Turkey's southern border after dark on Tuesday and had reached Istanbul, a base for the Western-backed Syrian National Coalition. A Western diplomatic source said he had confirmation that Habib had defected and was in Turkey. He dismissed a brief report on Syrian state television on Wednesday which said he was still at his home. The station has not repeated that denial and other state media have not mentioned Habib. The Turkish government, which hosts Syrian military officers who have defected, has not confirmed the general's presence. He has not been seen in public this week. ALAWITE RIFTS Alawites, who practice an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam, make up about an eighth of Syria's 22 million population. Many rose to prominence after Assad's father Hafez al-Assad seized power in a coup in 1970. Habib, born in 1939, was once army chief of staff and served as defense minister in 2009-11. Some opposition sources say that Habib disagreed with the use of force against protesters at the start of the revolt, which began in March 2011, and so he was dismissed as minister that August. Apparently unwilling to publicize the rift, Assad kept Habib quietly under guard while having him appear in public at times to make a show of loyalty, those sources said. Habib himself was quoted as saying that he had stepped down from the defense ministry on health grounds. Numerous senior military and political figures have deserted Assad since 2011, but most have been from the country's Sunni Muslim majority, while members of Assad's minority Alawite sect have largely remained loyal to his government. Western countries have been hoping for a senior Alawite to distance himself from Assad, so that someone could potentially represent the community in a political deal to end the war. Andrew Tabler, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute, said the defection of such a senior Alawite figure was "a major development" which could help the West lure other members of the community to break with Assad: "There are opportunities here." But other experts were more skeptical. Peter Harling, a Syria analyst with the International Crisis Group, said that because Habib had been out of office for two years, "it is inaccurate to describe him as someone whose defection would tell us much about the state of the regime today." Labwani, the veteran dissident, said he believed that both Washington, which backs the opposition, and Moscow, which backs Assad, could act jointly to promote Habib for a post-war role. "It seems that the Americans - and to a degree the Russians - are preparing him for a post-Assad role," he said, describing one possibility as Habib taking control of government forces and then negotiating with the rebels on a transitional government. "I am all for this roadmap," Labwani said. "Habib is the right man." Russia and the United States announced in May they would try to bring Syrian government and opposition representatives together at an international conference, but no date has been set and there is no sign it could be held in the near future. Accusing Assad of using poison gas last month on rebel-held suburbs of Damascus, U.S. President Barack Obama is seeking congressional approval for limited military action that the White House says is not aimed at overthrowing the government. Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose country has long armed Assad, has said rebels might have released the toxins and warned Obama against military action without U.N. backing. (Additional reporting by William Maclean and Oliver Holmes in Beirut; Editing by Alastair Macdonald and Peter Graff) ================ Obama wins backing for Syria strike from key figures in Congress Tue, Sep 03 18:36 PM EDT image 1 of 15 By Jeff Mason and Yara Bayoumy WASHINGTON/BEIRUT (Reuters) - President Barack Obama won the backing of key figures in the U.S. Congress, including Republicans, in his call for limited U.S. strikes on Syria to punish President Bashar al-Assad for his suspected use of chemical weapons against civilians. Speaking after the United Nations said two million Syrians had fled a conflict that posed the greatest threat to world peace since the Vietnam war, Obama said the United States also has a broader plan to help rebels defeat Assad's forces. In remarks that appeared to question the legality of U.S. plans to strike Syria without U.N. backing, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the use of force is only legal when it is in self-defense or with Security Council authorization. If U.N. inspectors confirm the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the Security Council, which has been deadlocked on the 2-1/2-year Syrian civil war, should overcome its differences and take action, Ban said. Having startled friends and foes alike by delaying a punitive attack on Assad until Congress reconvenes and agrees, Obama met congressional leaders at the White House to urge a prompt decision and assure them it did not mean another long war like Iraq or Afghanistan. John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor both pledged their support for military action after the meeting. Votes are expected to be held in the Senate and House next week, with the Republican-led House presenting the tougher challenge for Obama. The House leadership has indicated the votes will be "conscience votes," meaning they will not seek to influence members' votes on party lines. All the same, it would have been a blow to Obama if he had not secured the backing of the top two Republicans.

"I believe that my colleagues should support this call for action," Boehner told reporters. The president said strikes aimed at punishing the use of chemical weapons would hurt Assad's forces while other U.S. action would bolster his opponents - though the White House has insisted it is not seeking "regime change." "What we are envisioning is something limited. It is something proportional. It will degrade Assad's capabilities," Obama said. "At the same time we have a broader strategy that will allow us to upgrade the capabilities of the opposition."

Assad denies deploying poison gas that killed hundreds of civilians last month. The Syrian opposition, which said a forensic scientist had defected to the rebel side bringing evidence of the Assad forces' use of sarin gas in March, has appealed to Western allies to send them weapons and use their air power to end a war that has killed more than 100,000 and made millions homeless. ACCELERATING HUMAN COST The presence in rebel ranks of Islamist militants, some of them close to al Qaeda, has made Western leaders wary, while at the same time the undoubted - and apparently accelerating - human cost of the conflict has brought pressure to intervene. Top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi also voiced support for military strikes after meeting Obama, but he will still have to persuade some lawmakers, including Democrats, who have said they are concerned the president's draft resolution could be too open-ended. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel took the administration's message to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, where they were pressed on whether the resolution put to Congress would explicitly rule out the use of ground troops. Kerry said the language of the resolution was still being worked out, but it was important to leave options open for using troops in a scenario where "Syria imploded" and stockpiles of chemical weapons needed to be secured from extremists. "I don't want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to the president of the United States to secure our country," he said at the hearing. When some senators objected to the idea of "boots on the ground", Kerry said the administration would work with Congress to draft a resolution that addressed concerns about ground troops. "I know the administration has zero intention of putting troops on the ground and within the confines of this authorization, I'm confident we'd have zero problem with including some kind of prohibition there if that makes you comfortable," he told the senators. A Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Tuesday that Obama has failed so far to convince most Americans. Some 56 percent of those surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria, while only 19 percent supported action, essentially unchanged from last week. The U.N. High Commission for Refugees said there had been a near tenfold increase over the past 12 months in the rate of refugees crossing Syria's borders into Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon - to a daily average of nearly 5,000 men, women and children. This has pushed the total number of Syrians living abroad to more than 2 million. That represents some 10 percent of Syria's population, the UNHCR said. With a further 4.25 million estimated to have been displaced but still resident inside the country, close to one third of all Syrians are living away from their original homes. Comparing the figures to the peak of Afghanistan's refugee crisis two decades ago, U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres, said: "Syria has become the great tragedy of this century - a disgraceful humanitarian calamity with suffering and displacement unparalleled in recent history. "The risks for global peace and security that the present Syria crisis represents, I'm sure, are not smaller than what we have witnessed in any other crisis that we have had since the Vietnam war," said Guterres, a former Portuguese prime minister. Russia, backed by China, has used its veto power in the U.N. Security Council three times to block resolutions condemning Assad's government and threatening it with sanctions. Assad, like Russia, blames the rebels for the August 21 gas attack. OBAMA "COMFORTABLE" WITHOUT U.N. Obama has said he is "comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that so far has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable. Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari had sharp words for Obama's administration after a closed-door meeting between U.N. disarmament chief Angela Kane and the 37 U.N. member states that asked Ban to investigate the August 21 poison gas attack. "Who asked Mr. Obama to be the bully of the world?" Ja'afari said. Obama was due to leave Washington on Tuesday for a G20 meeting in Russia. France said foreign ministers of some of the G20 member states will convene on the sidelines of the meeting to discuss Syria. The conflict has divided the Middle East on sectarian lines, with Shi'ite Iran backing Assad and Washington's Sunni Arab Gulf allies supporting the mainly Sunni rebels. It has also revived Cold War-style tensions between the Western powers and Moscow. In an interview in Le Figaro, Assad told the French newspaper: "Everybody will lose control of the situation when the powder keg blows. There is a risk of a regional war." The influential pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC urged U.S. lawmakers to approve a resolution authorizing strikes to punish Assad. "This is a critical moment when America must also send a forceful message of resolve to Iran and Hezbollah - both of whom have provided direct and extensive military support to Assad," AIPAC said in a statement. The rebels have been struggling to hold ground in recent months, let alone advance. According to one opposition report, government forces took the strategic northwestern town of Ariha on Tuesday, though others said the battle was not over. While Obama's wait for Congress to return from its summer recess seems to rule out Western military action this week, Israeli forces training in the Mediterranean with the U.S. Navy set nerves on edge in Damascus with a missile test. When Moscow raised the alarm that its forces had detected the launch of two ballistic "objects" in the Mediterranean, thoughts of a surprise strike on Syria pushed oil prices higher. Clarification came only later when the Israeli Defence Ministry said that its troops had - at the time of the Russian alert - fired a missile that is used as a target for an anti-missile defence system during an exercise with U.S. forces. (Additional reporting by Tom Miles and Stephanie Nebehay in Geneva, Steve Gutterman and Timothy Heritage in Moscow, Jeffrey Heller and Dan Williams in Jerusalem, Dasha Afanasieva in Istanbul and Phil Stewart, Arshad Mohammed, Susan Cornwell and Andy Sullivan in Washington.; Writing by Claudia Parsons.; Editing by Christopher Wilson and Jim Loney) ============ Sep. 4, 2013 11:05 AM ET Religion news in brief By The Associated Press THE ASSOCIATED PRESS STATEMENT OF NEWS VALUES AND PRINCIPLES By The Associated Press In this photo taken on Sunday, Sept. 1, 2013, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd speaks during the Australian Labor Party's campaign launch in Brisbane, Australia. Rudd has mounted a spirited defense of same-sex marriage only days out from Australian elections. Rudd announced in May that he had reconsidered his opposition to same-sex marriage, and he promised to hold a Parliamentary vote on allowing gay couples to marry within 100 days if his center-left Labor Party wins the election. Rudd was questioned about his new stance at a nationally broadcast forum in his hometown of Brisbane late Monday, Sept. 2, 2013, by New Hope Church Pastor Matt Prater. (AP Photo/Tertius Pickard) In this photo taken on Sunday, Sept. 1, 2013, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd speaks during the Australian Labor Party's campaign launch in Brisbane, Australia. Rudd has mounted a spirited defense of same-sex marriage only days out from Australian elections. Rudd announced in May that he had reconsidered his opposition to same-sex marriage, and he promised to hold a Parliamentary vote on allowing gay couples to marry within 100 days if his center-left Labor Party wins the election. Rudd was questioned about his new stance at a nationally broadcast forum in his hometown of Brisbane late Monday, Sept. 2, 2013, by New Hope Church Pastor Matt Prater. (AP Photo/Tertius Pickard) Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat is seen during an interview with The Associated Press at his office in Jerusalem, Tuesday, Sept. 3, 2013. Barkat said any partition of the city as part of a future peace agreement will not work, insisting only a united city could function and thrive. (AP Photo/Sebastian Scheiner) In this Tuesday, Aug. 20, 2013 photo, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President Albert Mohler speaks at the school's convocation ceremony to open another academic year, in Louisville, Ky. Mohler has led the seminary for 20 years. (AP Photo/Bruce Schreiner) . . 1 of 3. . More News Video More NewsNM judge upholds county's gay marriage ruling Sep. 4, 2013 5:31 PM ET Mayor invites Illinois gay couples to wed in Minn. Sep. 4, 2013 5:08 PM ET Judge vows quick Pa. same-sex marriage case ruling Sep. 4, 2013 11:58 AM ET Judge sides with Ohio gay couple on death form Sep. 4, 2013 2:37 AM ET Texas Guard refuses to process same-sex benefits Sep. 3, 2013 9:07 PM ET Advertisement Advertisement Buy AP Photo Reprints Australian prime minister defends gay marriage CANBERRA, Australia (AP) — Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has defended his support for gay marriage at a pre-election forum. Rudd, a Roman Catholic who regularly attends church, has promised that a bill to create gay marriage in Australia would be voted on in Parliament within 100 days if his center-left Labor Party wins the national election on Saturday. Rudd was questioned about his stance at a nationally broadcast forum in his hometown of Brisbane Monday by New Hope Church Pastor Matt Prater. Prater quoted from the Bible a definition of marriage as a man leaving his father and mother to be united to his wife. Rudd replied that times change and the Bible also says slaves should be obedient to their masters. He said the fundamental principle of the New Testament is universal love. Australian opposition leader Tony Abbott, a former Roman Catholic seminarian, remains staunchly opposed to same-sex marriage. ___ Mayor says Jerusalem can't be split JERUSALEM (AP) — Jerusalem's mayor presides over a city divided between Arab and Jew, religious and secular, rich and poor, and claimed as a capital by both Israelis and Palestinians. But Nir Barkat, who is running for reelection, says Jerusalem is thriving. And with peace negotiators discussing its potential future partition, Barkat insists Jerusalem must remain united. Drawing on the city's ancient history, Barkat says Jerusalem has always been at its best when it allowed all who came to worship to feel a sense of belonging. The city's 800,000 residents are split almost evenly among secular and modern Orthodox residents, ultra-Orthodox Jews and Muslim Palestinians. The Arab population lives almost entirely in east Jerusalem, the sector captured by Israel in 1967 and claimed by the Palestinians as their capital. East Jerusalem also is home to key Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy sites. ___ Vatican finalizes removal of 2 NJ priests NEWARK, N.J. (AP) — The Vatican has defrocked two former New Jersey priests. The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark announced the changes in its online newspaper last month. One of the removed clerics, Richard Mieliwocki was accused of sexual misconduct involving minors in 1994. He was removed from ministry and put into treatment that he didn't complete. He left the priesthood and became a social worker. Mieliwocki pleaded guilty in 2007 to abusing two teenagers and was sentenced to probation. Horacio Daniel Medina Medina was removed from ministry in 2004 after being charged with sexual misconduct involving a minor. He pleaded guilty to two counts of child abuse in 2007. ___ Proposed non-discrimination ordinance stirs religious opposition SAN ANTONIO (AP) — Some San Antonio pastors are hoping to defeat a proposed ordinance that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The measure to be voted on Thursday would deny city contracts to businesses that don't agree to comply with the policy. A section has been removed that would have barred people from serving on boards and commissions if they had previously "demonstrated a bias, by word or deed." Such bias would only be banned now while commission or board members are "acting in their official capacity." Councilman Diego Bernal insists that his proposed ordinance "absolutely doesn't" infringe on First Amendment rights. But the Rev. Gerald Ripley of San Antonio's Abundant Life Church says he and other pastors are speaking out against a measure they view as an attack on religious liberty and freedom of speech. ___ Head of Southern Baptist school marks 20 years LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Albert Mohler was just 33 years old when he took over as president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., in 1993. Since then, Mohler has restored the Southern Baptist Convention's flagship school to more conservative beliefs even though it was at the cost of getting rid of some faculty. He marked his 20 years at the seminary in a recent convocation starting this new academic year. Mohler expressed satisfaction with the results of the transformation on campus. The enrollment, budget and endowment program have all grown. But Mohler acknowledged that the denomination and seminary are now outside the cultural mainstream on many issues, perhaps most notably on gay rights. While not addressing any one issue directly, Mohler called on students to stand for what they know is right. He warned that the Bible teaches, "To fail to say something, or to be silent in a time of trouble, is sin." Associated Press ========= AAA Sep. 5, 2013 7:09 PM ET US officials: US considers training Syria rebels By LOLITA C. BALDORBy LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press THE ASSOCIATED PRESS STATEMENT OF NEWS VALUES AND PRINCIPLES Chemical attacks make Syria top security risk Sep. 5, 2013 3:57 PM ET Divided vote foreshadows Obama challenge on Syria Sep. 5, 2013 8:37 AM ET Obama wins Senate panel's backing on Syria strike Sep. 4, 2013 5:58 PM ET War vote on Syria looms for White House hopefuls Sep. 3, 2013 9:39 PM ET Conflict, an alleged chemical attack, and fallout Aug. 31, 2013 4:57 AM ET Buy AP Photo Reprints WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is considering a plan to use U.S. military trainers to help increase the capabilities of the Syrian rebels, in a move that would greatly expand the current CIA training being done quietly in Jordan, U.S. officials told The Associated Press on Thursday. Any training would take place outside Syria, and one possible location would be Jordan. The officials said no decision had been made, but that discussions were going on at high levels of the government. It comes as the Obama administration prods Congress to authorize limited military strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad's government in retaliation for a deadly Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack. The proposal to use the U.S. military to train the rebels — something the administration has resisted through more than two years of civil war — would answer the demands of some lawmakers, including Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., to do more to train and equip the Syrian opposition. President Barack Obama in June decided to provide lethal aid to the rebels, but so far none of that assistance has gotten to the opposition. Officials said Thursday that talk about a military training mission has increased but that there have been no specific Pentagon recommendations forwarded to the White House on how big it should be or how many troops it should involve. The CIA has been training select groups of rebels in Jordan on the use of communications equipment and some weapons provided by Gulf states. The new discussions center on whether the U.S. military should take over the mission so that hundreds or thousands can be trained, rather than just dozens. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plan publicly. Any new training program conducted by the U.S. military would take time to put in place and likely would not begin until after any potential military action had been taken in response to the recent chemical weapons attack. It would require getting approvals from the host country, finding appropriate locations, getting the right number of personnel in place to conduct the training and setting up a vetting system to insure that instruction was not provided to any rebel groups that may not be friendly to the U.S. The Pentagon already has at least 1,000 troops in Jordan, including trainers working with Jordanian forces. The U.S. left about a dozen fighter jets and a Patriot missile battery there after a recent training exercise. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has told Congress that the U.S. military would be prepared to do more training for the Syria opposition if needed. In response to questioning Wednesday during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Syria, Dempsey said he was "mostly supportive of helping the opposition by their development, by their training and equipping, not by becoming their military arm." He provided more details in a July letter to Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services, in which he laid out military options in response to the chemical weapons attack. That letter was sent before Obama announced plans to go to Congress to seek authorization for military strikes in Syria that would be limited in time and scope and would involve no U.S. troops on the ground there. He said the U.S. could provide between several hundred and several thousand trainers, with a cost of as much as $500 million a year, depending on how large the training mission became. Noting that it would require using "safe areas" outside Syria, he said the risks included "extremists gaining access to additional capabilities, retaliatory cross-border attacks, and insider attacks or inadvertent association with war crimes due to vetting difficulties." In hearings this week, some members of Congress complained that the Obama administration has not done enough for the rebels, while others strongly opposed any American military involvement in Syria. Lawmakers warned Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that Americans are weary of war and are not willing to spend more money and risk more lives. U.S. officials continue to say that any likely military action would be limited and bear no resemblance to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or even the short military operation in Libya in 2010. Instead, it would center on cruise missiles fired from U.S. ships — including submarines — in the Mediterranean Sea. There also is no enthusiasm for sending U.S. pilots into Syrian airspace. If additional military assets are needed in order to strike a larger number of targets inside Syria, the U.S. could use long-range bombers, which could fire missiles without crossing into the country's airspace. France also has a dozen cruise missile-capable fighter aircraft at military bases in the United Arab Emirates and the Horn of Africa nation of Djibouti. Associated Press ======================= AAA Sep. 5, 2013 9:00 PM ET 10 Things to Know for Friday By The Associated Press THE ASSOCIATED PRESS STATEMENT OF NEWS VALUES AND PRINCIPLES By The Associated Press New York National Guard Staff Sgt. Edwin Caba, left, is reunited with one of eight dogs rescued from the battlefield in Afghanistan and flown to New York, Wednesday, Sept. 4, 2013 in Port Jefferson Station, NY, where they are to be adopted by some of the soldiers who found them in Afghanistan. At right is 1st Lt. Joseph LaPenta. (AP Photo/Frank Eltman) New York National Guard Staff Sgt. Edwin Caba, left, is reunited with one of eight dogs rescued from the battlefield in Afghanistan and flown to New York, Wednesday, Sept. 4, 2013 in Port Jefferson Station, NY, where they are to be adopted by some of the soldiers who found them in Afghanistan. At right is 1st Lt. Joseph LaPenta. (AP Photo/Frank Eltman) Andy Murray, of Great Britain, reacts during a break between sets after losing the first two sets to Stanislas Wawrinka, of Switzerland, during the quarterfinals of the 2013 U.S. Open tennis tournament, Thursday, Sept. 5, 2013, in New York. (AP Photo/David Goldman) . . 1 of 2. . More News Video More NewsTropical Storm Lorena nears western Mexico coast Sep. 5, 2013 10:58 PM ET Program introduces electric rental cars in Orlando Sep. 5, 2013 10:27 PM ET Castro's son in Argentina for Olympic baseball Sep. 5, 2013 7:22 PM ET Alec Baldwin gets MSNBC talk show Sep. 5, 2013 5:16 PM ET Tropical Storm Lorena forms in Pacific, off coast of Mexico; expected to bring heavy rains Sep. 5, 2013 5:18 PM ET Advertisement Advertisement Buy AP Photo Reprints Your daily look at late-breaking news, upcoming events and the stories that will be talked about Friday: 1. U.S. CONSIDERS USING MILITARY TO TRAIN SYRIAN REBELS The proposal would take time to put in place and likely would not begin until after possible strikes. 2. OBAMA RUNS INTO OPPOSITION FOR A STRIKE IN SYRIA Russia, China and the European Union condemn the chemical weapons attack in Assad's country but say it's too soon for military action. 3. WHAT POPE FRANCIS WROTE ABOUT SYRIA Francis ratcheted up his call for peace and urged the G-20 "to lay aside the futile pursuit of a military solution." 4. THE HEALTH CARE LAW "TRADE OFF" Low-cost 'bronze' plans would enable consumers to pay very low premiums up front, but they face higher costs if they get sick. 5. OHIO MAN'S VIDEO CONFESSION The 22-year-old says he takes responsibility for the death of another man in a wrong-way car crash after a night of heavy drinking. 6. GEORGE ZIMMERMAN'S WIFE FILES FOR DIVORCE Shellie Zimmerman said the couple lived "like gypsies" after her husband was released from jail, spending nights in a 20-foot trailer in the woods. 7. WHY GUT BACTERIA COULD BE A HIDDEN ALLY Different kinds of germs that live inside the gut can help spur obesity or protect against it, scientists say. 8. TEEN KILLED BY REMOTE CONTROL HELICOPTER NYC police say the 19-year-old operating the chopper was struck in the head and died at the scene. 9. DOGS OF WAR National Guard soldiers from New York who befriended a stray while on patrol in Afghanistan reunite with the mixed breed and her seven puppies. 10. MURRAY MAKES UNEXPECTED EXIT AT U.S. OPEN Ninth-seeded Stanislas Wawrinka reached his first Grand Slam semifinal with an upset 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 win over the defending champion. Associated Press ======== Kamal Allabwani ماذا يطبخ تجار الشام على نار جهنم د. محمد كمال اللبواني في الثمانين كاد نظام حافظ الأسد أن يسقط عندما أضربت المدن السورية كلها ، لكن زعامة تجار ومشايخ دمشق ( بأسمائهم المعروفة ) يومها رفضوا المشاركة في الإضراب العام ، ووقفوا مع النظام الذي استعاد السيطرة بالتدريج وقمع واعتقل ، ثم توج قمعه بسحق مدينة حماه ، وفرض نظاما من الخوف والفساد ثلاثين عاما بعدها . حتى اندلعت الثورة مرة أخرى ، والتي هي ثورة الحرية والكرامة ، وثورة المساواة أيضا، بالنظر لكون جل من نهضت على أكتافهم هم من الفقراء ، ولهذا يتركز القمع على أحيائهم وقراهم ، التي أصبحت رمادا بعد عين . وتأخرت ثورة مدينة حلب بسبب بعض تجارها الذين ساندوا النظام ومولوا شبيحته ، بعكس تجار حمص مثلا ، واليوم تتكرر المحاولة من قبل بعض تجار دمشق لتقديم حبل النجاة لنظام الفساد والاستبداد ، بحجة الحوار ثم الحل السياسي الذي من شأنه أن يعطي للنظام الزمن الكافي (سنة ونصف) ، ليعيد بناء تحالفاته ، ويحصنها ، ويقمع الباقين تحت مسمى الإرهاب والتطرف ،أو ينفصل عنهم نهائيا في دولة مستقلة ، ومن يقوم بهذه المحاولة هم ذاتهم رموز ذات الشريحة الاجتماعية الاقتصادية ( فالآباء أنقذوا الأب المجرم ،والأبناء يحاولون انقاذ الابن الأكثر اجراما ) أقصد بعض تجار ومشايخ المدينة أصدقاء السلطة وشركائها . عبر التاريخ الإسلامي السني ، تكرس حلف تقليدي غير نزيه بين التاجر والحاكم والشيخ ،فالمستبد يقمع والتاجر يربح والشيخ يلطف الصورة ويعطيها الشرعية والقدرية. تحالف قديم رسخ الاستبداد والتخلف والجهل والفقر طيلة قرون . بسبب جشع التاجر ، وطغيان الحاكم ، ونفاق الشيخ ، ولذلك يندر في التاريخ أن تدافع دمشق المحكومة من قبل هذا الثالوث غير المقدس ، عن أسوارها أمام أي من الغزاة ، بل كانت كرامتها وحريتها تأتيها من ريفها رمز العزة الذي يعيش حياة التقشف ولا يبخل بالمال والولد كلما اقتضت الضرورة ، ومن يعرف دمشق يميز بين الجواني والبراني ( داخل وخارج السور ) ويعرف تاريخ ونوعية كل حي أو قرية أو ضاحية . أو حتى عائلة . دمشق العريقة في التاريخ ، تحتوي كل المتباين وكل المختلف وتستوعبه فيها البطل والتقي والشهم وفيها الأناني والذاتي الذي لا يرى سوى مصلحته الخاصة ، وهي ليست على نمط واحد من الثقافة ، أو مكونة من طبقة اقتصادية واحدة منسجمة ، أو حتى ذات مرجعية دينية موحدة . ولكن لتاريخها السياسي طابع يكاد يوجد في كل المدن الاسلامية ، وإن كانت هي نموذجها ، محكوم بثالوث المستبد والتاجر والشيخ ، وهذا لا يعني عدم وجود نوع آخر من التجار الأخلاقيين أو من المشايخ المخلصين لله ، الذين دفعوا حريتهم وثروتهم بسبب ذلك . لكنهم ليسوا الطرف المهيمن في عصر الاستبداد الذي يفرض سلطته وثقافته . والاستبداد الذي ترسخ في العقود الأخيرة بحافظ الأسد ثم بولده ، جاء مدعوما من ذات الشريحة ، وزرع سوريا بكل ألوان الفساد والإفساد وخرب الاقتصاد والانسان والقيم والوطن ، وحوله لمزرعة تشبيح ، وتكيف معه شريحة من المنتفعين السقط ، ومنهم وأهمهم اجتماعيا بعض التجار ، و بعض المشايخ الذين تلونوا بألوان النظام وشاركوه ، في حين أن أغلب من رفض هاجر إلى دول أخرى ، أو انتهى في السجون ، وعندما قامت الثورة ظن الكثيرون أنها سرعان ما ستنتهي بإسقاط النظام على الطريقة المصرية ، فاندفع البعض لركوبها بطبعه الانتهازي ، لكن مع طول المدة وارتفاع الثمن بسبب تشكل حلف دولي لإنقاذ النظام ، ونجاحه في تحويل الثورة لحرب اقليمية ، إلى حد ما ، عاد قسم منهم للتحالف معه ، ومحاولة انقاذه خاصة بعد أن هددت مصالحهم وثرواتهم وامتيازاتهم بشكل جدي ، وأصبحوا لا يثقون بالقادم الجديد . فتنادت هذه الزمرة للعمل بمساعدة روسية وايرانية ودولية لتجديد الحلف الطبقي الاقتصادي الذي يحمل النظام ويديمه حتى لو تغيرت رموزه . في محاولة متجددة لوأد الثورة السورية التي تبشر بتغير جذري في المنطقة . وها نحن نحذر من خطورة محاولة مد حبل نجاة للنظام ، تحت أي مبرر ، ومن خطورة اعادة تشكيل حلف غير نزيه لتجديده ، مكون من رموز الفساد والثروة الملوثة ، وكل المنتفعين السابقين من النظام ، والمتضررين من الثورة ، والمدعوم من طابور خامس يفكر بطريقة غريزية ،لم يفهم ولا يريد الثورة ، ومن كل الخائفين من الخطاب والمظاهر المتطرفة والمتعصبة التي طغت على الثورة ، هذا الحلف كبير لدرجة قد تكون كافية لعزل الثوار ، واتهامهم بالتطرف والارهاب ، ومن ثم العمل على هزيمتهم عسكريا باسم الحكومة الانتقالية والحل السياسي وفرض الأمن .. أي في النتيجة قتل الثورة و الحفاظ على النظام الطبقي القديم الذي يكرس فقر الريف وتبعيته واستغلال كل فئات المجتمع من قبل ذات ثالوث الشر. لكي يبقى الأسد رمز انتصار ايران وروسيا و عنوان هزيمة الثورة ، ونحذر من أن يلاقيهم في منتصف الطريق مشروع التحالف الإخواني الإيراني الذي تقوده مصر ، فنذهب نحو نوع جديد من الاستبداد ، المترافق مع هيمنة وغزو استيطاني يكرس ، بل يخلد ، خنوع وبؤس فقرائنا وريفنا الذين يشكلون الأغلبية . وبدل أن يكون انتصار الثورة السورية بوابة للتغيير في كل المنطقة ، تصبح هزيمتها بوابة للجمود والتخلف ولتكريس حالة الذل والتبعية والفقر والجهل للغالبية ، والتي هي متعة السلطة المطلقة المستبدة المالكة للثروة أيضا . لهذا نحن في هذا السياق مضطرون لضخ شعارات جديدة وأهداف جديدة اقتصادية هذه المرة ، لهذه الثورة تتعلق بمحاسبة رموز الفساد والإثراء الفاسد ، وتعويض المتضررين وما أكثرهم من مال هؤلاء شركاء النظام . فالثورة لا تكتمل من دون تفكيك المنظمة الأمنية والاقتصادية التي قام عليها النظام البائد . واقامة العدالة الاجتماعية والاقتصادية ، و نحن نطلب من كل شريف في دمشق وخاصة من تجارها إعلان موقف صريح وواضح من النظام والثورة ، وكذلك من جماعة الإخوان المسلمين اعلان موقف صريح وواضح من النظام الإيراني وقطع كل صلة معهم ، ومن الثوار الكف عن رفع الشعارات التي تثير مخاوف الكثيرين وتستفزهم ، والانغماس جميعا في ثورة الحرية والعدالة والحق ، الحق الذي وحده قادر على جمعنا ، وإلا فستكون حربا طويلة ليس فقط مع النظام ، بل بين مكونات المجتمع ، و بين طبقاته أيضا ، حرب مساواة وعدالة ، وليس فقط حرية وكرامة ، وفهمكم كفاية (وإذا أردنا أن نهلك قرية أمرنا مترفيها ففسقوا فيها فحق عليها القول فدمرناها تدميرا ) = Kamal Allabwani Why cook Sham Dealers Hell D . Mohamed Kamal Labwani In eighty CAD system Hafez al-Assad to fall when أضربت Syrian cities as a whole, but the leadership of the traders and chieftains Damascus ( their names known) that day refused to participate in the general strike, and stood with a system that recaptures gradually , Suppress and was arrested , then capped repression to crush the city of Hama , and the imposition of a system of fear and corruption thirty years later . Even the revolution broke out again, and that is a revolution of freedom and dignity , equality revolution also , given the fact that the bulk of got up on their shoulders are poor , but this repression is concentrated on their neighborhoods and villages, which became ashes of an eye. The delayed revolution city of Aleppo due to some traders who supported the system and financed Hbihth , unlike traders Homs , for example , and today repeated attempt by some traders Damascus to provide a lifeline for the system of corruption and tyranny, under the pretext of dialogue and a political solution which would give the system time enough (a year and a half) , to rebuild alliances , and Ihsnha , suppresses the rest under the pretext of terrorism and extremism , or separated from them permanently in an independent state , and doing the attempt are the same symbols slide socio-economic ( Parents save the father of the offender, and children are trying to save son most اجراما ) I mean, some traders and chieftains city ​​Friends of the authority and its partners . Throughout history, the Sunni Muslim , devoting NATO traditional unfairly between the trader and the ruler , Sheikh , Valmstbd suppresses and trader wins Sheikh softens the image and gives it legitimacy and fatalism . Old cemented the alliance of tyranny and backwardness , ignorance and poverty for centuries . Because of the greed of the trader, and the tyranny of the ruling , and the hypocrisy of Sheikh , so rare in history to defend Damascus governed by this unholy trinity , the walls in front of any of the invaders , but the dignity and freedom gets her from the countryside code pride , who live a life of austerity does not spare money and the boy whenever necessary , and knows Damascus distinguishes between Goan and Albrani ( inside and outside the fence) and knows the history and the quality of every neighborhood , village or suburb. Or even family . Damascus ancient history , each variant and each different and absorbed by the hero and met Gallant and the selfish and self- saw only its own interest , which is not one type of culture, composed of a layer a single economic harmony , or even with a religious uniform. But for its history of political character hardly found in every Islamic cities , although it is a model , doomed بثالوث tyrannical and trader Sheikh , this does not mean there is no other type of traders moral or religious leaders loyal to God, who paid their liberty and their wealth because of it. But they are not the dominant party in the era of tyranny , which imposes its authority and its culture. And tyranny entrenched in recent decades on signing Assad and his son , was supported by the same slide, and the laying of Syria all the colors of corruption and corruption and ruined the economy and human values ​​and the nation , and around the farm Chbih , and adaptation slice of beneficiaries fallout , including and most notably socially some traders , and some elders who Tlenoa colors system and شاركوه , while the majority of rejected emigrated to other countries , or ended up in prison , and when the revolution many thought they soon will end fall of the regime on the Egyptian way , rushed some to ride naturally trimmer, but with the length of time and the high price because of a an international alliance to save the system, and its success in converting to a regional war , revolution , to some extent, some of them returned to the alliance with him , and try to save him , especially after that threatened their interests and their wealth and privileges in earnest, and they are not trust new بالقادم . Vtnadt this bunch to work with the help of Russian , Iranian and international economic class renewal of the alliance system that carries and يديمه even if its symbols have changed . In a renewed attempt to bury the Syrian revolution that promises a radical change in the region. Here we warn of the danger of trying to extend a lifeline of the system, under any pretext , and the seriousness of the restructuring of NATO is impartial renovated , a component of the symbols of corruption and wealth contaminated , and all users of the former from the system, and those affected by the revolution, and is backed by a fifth column thinks instinctive , not understands and does not want the revolution , and all frightened of speech and appearances extremist and fanatic which dominated the revolution, this alliance is so great may be sufficient to isolate the rebels, and accused of extremism and terrorism , and then work to defeat them militarily on behalf of the transitional government and a political solution and impose security .. Any result in the killing of the revolution and maintain the old caste system which enshrines rural poverty and dependence and exploitation of all segments of society by the triad of evil. Order to keep the lion symbol of the victory of Iran, Russia and the title of defeat of the revolution, and warn that Alaqém in the middle of the road project coalition Brotherhood Iranian -led Egypt, Venzhb towards a new kind of tyranny , combined with the dominance and the invasion of settlement devote, but honors , meek ​​and misery of our poor and Rivne , who make up the majority. And instead of being a Syrian Revolution victory gate of change in each region , become gateway to defeat the stagnation and underdevelopment and to devote state of humiliation and dependency , poverty and ignorance of the majority , which is fun royal tyrannical absolute power of wealth as well . For this in this context , we are compelled to inject new slogans and new economic goals this time, for this revolution of accountability symbols of corruption and corrupt enrichment , and compensation for those affected and most of the money these partners regime . The revolution is not complete without dismantling the security and economic organization on which the regime. And the establishment of social and economic justice , We ask each Sharif in Damascus , especially from traders announced position clear and explicit from the system and the revolution, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood announcement position clear and explicit of the Iranian regime and cut off all connection with them , and the rebels to refrain from raising slogans that raise fears of many and تستفزهم , indulging all in the revolution of freedom, justice and right, right, which alone is capable of collected , otherwise it will be a long war not only with the system, but between the components of society, and between classes , too, the war of equality and justice , not just the freedom and dignity, and your understanding of the adequacy of ( If we are to perish a hurry مترفيها village ففسقوا the right of the say destructive فدمرناها ) ====== Syrian government TV call Barack Obama a slave , a Monkey ,a kunte Kunte of America August 25, 2013 Clip No. 3960 On Syrian TV, Threats to Annihilate U.S. Forces and Israel with Chemical Weapons, by Swedish-Algerian Journalist Abu Zakariya Following are excerpts from an address by Swedish-Algerian journalist and Mayadeen TV host Yahya Abu Zakariya, which aired on Syrian TV on August 25, 2013. Yahya Abu Zakariya: Barack Obama, you American lowlife, you American beggar, you have abandoned your black people, and have not avenged the honor of the blacks, who were persecuted in America, since the days of Kunta Kinte, whom the U.S. kidnapped from Mozambique [sic], to the days of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King. The blacks suffered injustice at the hands of the white people, who have enslaved you in order to expand into the Arab world. I say to Barack Obama: This is Syria, so lower your voice. I say to Obama: This is the Syrian army, so lower your voice. You American lowlife, Syria is not the kind of country that can be invaded. As far as chemical weapons and nuclear bombs are concerned, the [Americans] are the ones who have destroyed humanity. Oh Obama, I'm not telling you to wash yourself before talking about Syria, because you are as impure as your slaves in the sheep-like Gulf states, but I am telling you to have some self-respect. The Arab Syria army is an honorable army, which does not harm children and does not fight with chemical weapons. The chemical weapons are reserved for the Israeli entity and for America, if it set foot on Syrian soil. By Allah, we will annihilate them. By God, the moment the U.S. so much as thinks of intervening in Syria – and I speak on behalf of the resistance axis, as I am permitted to do – the Galilee in northern Palestine will be conquered by the Lebanese resistance, Iran will shut down the Strait of Hormuz, and our missiles are at the ready. The Syrian military command was given the order in advance – If Syria is attacked, we will annihilate the Zionist entity. […] There is a principle that I have learnt by working in the media for over a quarter of a century: The U.S. is a lying, bastard country. When it talks of war, it wants peace, and vice versa. You cannot trust the Americans. The sheep-like emirs of the Gulf trusted America because they have prostrated themselves in submission. Some of them have grown so fat that they must kneel down, and the others – I have no idea what happened to them. They have become so effeminate that they sell out their country's sovereignty. At this point, I would like to direct a message to Bandar bin Sultan, who heads the Saudi intelligence: Do not play with fire. By the way, in the Indian language, Bandar means "ape." […] We do not want Barack Obama – that slave, who has placed the honor of the blacks in the service of the neocons – to come to a bleak end. If you come and intervene, we will annihilate you. We have surprises up our sleeve. […] This is the language of David Cameron and Barack Obama. The pair of them are bastard children. Really. Barack Obama purports to be a graduate of the Harvard Law School, but he knows nothing about law. He slaughters Pakistanis with drone strikes in Pakistan and Afghanistan. As for David Cameron – we should send him to Cameroon in Africa, to be eat by a tribe of cannibals, who would relieve us of his evil. We'd like to remind them that we have 10,000 martyrdom-seekers as well. When the first American unit enters from Jordan – you can only imagine how many of them will be killed. […] In all honesty, if I had chemical bombs, I would drop them on the Arab League. By God, if I had nuclear or chemical bombs, I would drop them on the Arab League in Cairo. == http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=riFAeUZZtLA 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls Published time: September 05, 2013 15:24 Edited time: September 05, 2013 16:58 Get short URL Reuters/Hugh Gentry Reuters/Hugh Gentry Share on tumblrTrends Syria unrest Tags Arms, Military, Politics, Security, Syria, USA The potential of strategic US strikes in Syria has sparked fears Damascus’ chemical weapons could fall into the wrong hands if the government is toppled. A recent congressional report says 75,000 troops would be needed to safeguard the WMD caches. The Congressional Research Center (CRS) report, issued just one day before the alleged August 21 chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb, was compiled with the aim of “responding to possible scenarios involving the use, change of hands, or loss of control of Syrian chemical weapons.” It states that Syria’s chemical weapon stockpiles, which a French intelligence report recently estimated at over 1,000 tons, have been secured by Syrian special forces. “Due to the urgency of preventing access to these weapons by unauthorized groups, including terrorists, the United States government has been preparing for scenarios to secure the weapons in the event of the Assad regime’s loss of control,” the document reads Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 7, 2012, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned the ouster of Assad would present a scenario “100 times worse than what we dealt with in Libya.” In order to secure the 50 chemical weapon and production sites spread across Syria, in addition to storage and research facilities, “The Pentagon has estimated that it would take over 75,000 troops to neutralize the chemical weapons,” the document continues, citing a February 2012 CNN report. Meanwhile, a resolution backing the use of force against President Bashar Assad's government cleared the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on a 10-7 vote on Wednesday, although section 3 of the draft ostensibly ruled out US combat operations on the ground. The wording of the text, however, could potentially allow for troops on the ground for the sake of non-offensive operations, including securing chemical weapons stockpiles and production facilities. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry reacts as he waits for U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to arrive as he appears at a U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Syria on Capitol Hill in Washington, September 4, 2013. (Reuters/Jason Reed)U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry reacts as he waits for U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to arrive as he appears at a U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Syria on Capitol Hill in Washington, September 4, 2013. (Reuters/Jason Reed) While the Senate committee initially opted to limit US military involvement in the country to 90 days with no potential of ground operations, Republican Senator John McCain joined forces with Democratic Senator Chris Coons to add a provision calling for "decisive changes to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria." The Obama administration’s vacillations on Syria were perhaps best exemplified by Secretary of State John Kerry. Speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday, Kerry suggested it would be preferable to give the White House the power to send in ground forces in the event that Syria “imploded” or if chemical weapons were at risk of being obtained by extremists. "I don't want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to a president of the United States to secure our country," he told the committee in the run up to the vote. After being told by Senator Bob Corker – the top Republican on the committee – his sentiments regarding boots on the ground were not “a very appropriate response,” Kerry quickly backtracked. "Let's shut the door now," Kerry said. "The answer is, whatever prohibition clarifies it to Congress or the American people, there will not be American boots on the ground with respect to the civil war." Having cleared committee, the measure authorizing force in Syria is expected to reach the Senate floor next week. Senator Rand Paul, a republican with strong ties to the Tea Party movement, has threatened a filibuster. == ran, not Syria, is the West's real target Iran is ever more deeply involved in protecting the Syrian government. Thus a victory for Bashar is a victory for Iran. And Iranian victories cannot be tolerated by the West 1 / 1A general view shows a heavily damaged street in Syria's eastern town of Deir Ezzor on August 26, 2013. the stupidest Western war in the history of the modern world begins – I am, of course, referring to the attack on Syria that we all yet have to swallow – it might be as well to say that the cruise missiles which we confidently expect to sweep onto one of mankind’s oldest cities have absolutely nothing to do with Syria. They are intended to harm Iran. They are intended to strike at the Islamic republic now that it has a new and vibrant president – as opposed to the crackpot Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – and when it just might be a little more stable. Iran is Israel’s enemy. Iran is therefore, naturally, America’s enemy. So fire the missiles at Iran’s only Arab ally. There is nothing pleasant about the regime in Damascus. Nor do these comments let the regime off the hook when it comes to mass gassing. But I am old enough to remember that when Iraq – then America’s ally – used gas against the Kurds of Hallabjah in 1988, we did not assault Baghdad. Indeed, that attack would have to wait until 2003, when Saddam no longer had any gas or any of the other weapons we had nightmares over. And I also happen to remember that the CIA put it about in 1988 that Iran was responsible for the Hallabjah gassings, a palpable lie that focused on America’s enemy whom Saddam was then fighting on our behalf. And thousands – not hundreds – died in Hallabjah. But there you go. Different days, different standards. And I suppose it’s worth noting that when Israel killed up to 17,000 men, women and children in Lebanon in 1982, in an invasion supposedly provoked by the attempted PLO murder of the Israeli ambassador in London – it was Saddam’s mate Abu Nidal who arranged the killing, not the PLO, but that doesn’t matter now – America merely called for both sides to exercise “restraint”. And when, a few months before that invasion, Hafez al-Assad – father of Bashar – sent his brother up to Hama to wipe out thousands of Muslim Brotherhood rebels, nobody muttered a word of condemnation. “Hama Rules” is how my old mate Tom Friedman cynically styled this bloodbath. Anyway, there’s a different Brotherhood around these days – and Obama couldn’t even bring himself to say “boo” when their elected president got deposed. But hold on. Didn’t Iraq – when it was “our” ally against Iran – also use gas on the Iranian army? It did. I saw the Ypres-like wounded of this foul attack by Saddam – US officers, I should add, toured the battlefield later and reported back to Washington – and we didn’t care a tinker’s curse about it. Thousands of Iranian soldiers in the 1980-88 war were poisoned to death by this vile weapon. I travelled back to Tehran overnight on a train of military wounded and actually smelled the stuff, opening the windows in the corridors to release the stench of the gas. These young men had wounds upon wounds – quite literally. They had horrible sores wherein floated even more painful sores that were close to indescribable. Yet when the soldiers were sent to Western hospitals for treatment, we journos called these wounded – after evidence from the UN infinitely more convincing than what we’re likely to get from outside Damascus – “alleged” gas victims. So what in heaven’s name are we doing? After countless thousands have died in Syria’s awesome tragedy, suddenly – now, after months and years of prevarication – we are getting upset about a few hundred deaths. Terrible. Unconscionable. Yes, that is true. But we should have been traumatised into action by this war in 2011. And 2012. But why now? I suspect I know the reason. I think that Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless army might just be winning against the rebels whom we secretly arm. With the assistance of the Lebanese Hezbollah – Iran’s ally in Lebanon – the Damascus regime broke the rebels in Qusayr and may be in the process of breaking them north of Homs. Iran is ever more deeply involved in protecting the Syrian government. Thus a victory for Bashar is a victory for Iran. And Iranian victories cannot be tolerated by the West. And while we’re on the subject of war, what happened to those magnificent Palestinian-Israeli negotiations that John Kerry was boasting about? While we express our anguish at the hideous gassings in Syria, the land of Palestine continues to be gobbled up. Israel’s Likudist policy – to negotiate for peace until there is no Palestine left – continues apace, which is why King Abdullah of Jordan’s nightmare (a much more potent one than the “weapons of mass destruction” we dreamed up in 2003) grows larger: that “Palestine” will be in Jordan, not in Palestine. But if we are to believe the nonsense coming out of Washington, London, Paris and the rest of the “civilised” world, it’s only a matter of time before our swift and avenging sword smiteth the Damascenes. To observe the leadership of the rest of the Arab world applauding this destruction is perhaps the most painful historical experience for the region to endure. And the most shameful. Save for the fact that we will be attacking Shia Muslims and their allies to the handclapping of Sunni Muslims. And that’s what civil war is made of. === Iran’s Quds Force: We Will Support Syria to the End Posted on September 4, 2013 by Arash Karami Screen Shot 2013-09-04 at 8.34.10 AM The head of Iran’s Quds Force, which is in charge of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp’s operations outside of Iran’s borders, reportedly spoke yesterday about Syria at a meeting of the Assembly of Experts. According to an assembly member who was present at the meeting, Major General Ghassem Soleimani said that “Some criticize why we support Syria so much. To them, we have to answer that we do not pay attention to the propaganda of the enemy, because Syria is the frontline of resistance and this reality is undeniable. We have a duty to defend Muslims because they are under pressure and oppression.” On the US role in Syria, Soleimani believes that “America has tested various methods in toppling [President] Bashar [al-Assad]. Political pressure and bringing in al-Qaeda are among those, and the latest excuse is the use of chemical weapons, and in this case they will also not get results.” On the latest developments in the region, Soleimani said, “Americans want democracy in Egypt, in Syria they want human rights, and in Iran they are worried about the nuclear discussion, but their original goal is to break the resistance front.” Iran considers itself, Hezbollah and Syria part of a resistance front against US and Israeli hegemony in the region. “We will support Syria to the end,” Soleimani said. “And now the Syria case has become a matter of honor for America. Therefore, they struggle so much and seemingly, they want to come out of it successful.” Soleimani continued, “In case of an attack on Syria, seven countries — Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, France, England, America and Israel — are at the front line and indeed believe in the downfall of Bashar Assad.” He added, “Now the leaders of the Zionist regime and some countries in the region oddly insist that Bashar should leave and even say that if al-Qaeda comes, it is better than Bashar.” Soleimani said that “95% of those who fight in Syria are foreigners, and their leaders are in foreign countries, and the remaining 5% are army defectors who form the Free [Syrian] Army, and some of Syria’s Salafis are part of this 5%.” He added that al-Qaeda-affiliated groups such as Jabhat al-Nusra come from various countries and that “They do extremely brutal things, and some of it is so atrocious that it cannot be talked about, such that some of Assad’s opposition say that if there were an election they would vote for Assad — that Bashar is more democratic than them.” On regional competition between Iran and some Arab countries and the money given to Libya after the downfall of Moammar Gadhafi by Arab countries in the Persian Gulf, Soleimani said, “Some countries in the Persian Gulf are pursuing an agenda of Iranphobia, and their main issue is this. Some countries in the region fear the influence of Iran in Islamic countries. With this aim, Qatar has spent $12 billion in Syria, but given this, Iran has a good position in Islamic countries.” On Iran’s influence in Iraq and invading or Western countries, Soleimani said, “After the fall of Saddam [Hussein], there was talk by various individuals that they should manage Iraq, but with Iraq’s sources of emulation [Shia religious leaders] and Iran’s influence, America could not reach its goal.” After the invasion of Iraq, it is believed that Soleimani exerted considerable influence on various Iraqi politicians and Shia militias. Soleimani added, “Iraq’s Sunni scholars and clerics are killed by al-Qaeda to start a Shia-Sunni war.” === Obama's history-defying decision to seek congressional approval on Syria US President Barack Obama speaks about Syria outside the White House in Washington, DC on August 31, 2013 .View gallery . Walter Shapiro Walter Shapiro September 1, 2013 10:32 AM President Barack Obama, according to background briefings by his aides, reached a fateful decision late Friday afternoon as he strolled along the White House lawn with his chief of staff Denis McDonough. Contrary to every expectation by his national security team, Obama concluded that he should ask Congress for authorization to bomb Syria. The full reasoning behind the president’s turnabout remains murky. He may have wanted to share responsibility for a risky strategy to punish the barbarous regime of Syrian strongman Bashar Assad for using chemical weapons against his own people. Obama may have recognized the political dangers of attacking another Middle Eastern country without popular support at home. And the president, a former part-time constitutional law professor, may have also belatedly recalled the wording of Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution that grants Congress the sole power “to declare war.” But whatever Obama’s underlying motivations and however the Syrian vote plays out on Capitol Hill, the president’s decision to go to Congress represents a historic turning point. It may well be the most important presidential act on the Constitution and war-making powers since Harry Truman decided to sidestep Congress and not seek its backing to launch the Korean war. Just a few days ago, before Obama’s decision was known, legal scholars from both the right and the left were in agreement that waging war over Syria — no matter how briefly — without congressional approval would bend the Constitution beyond recognition. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor who served as a Bush administration lawyer during the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war, wrote in the legal blog Lawfare, “The planned use of military force in Syria is a constitutional stretch that will push presidential war unilateralism beyond where it has gone before.” And liberal constitutional scholar Garrett Epps, writing for the Atlantic , concluded, “It’s pretty clear that an American attack would violate the Constitution.” Virtually no one in politics, the press or the academic community expected Obama to go to Congress for approval. That isn’t the way the presidential power works in the modern era. It is a sad truth that whoever occupies the Oval Office invariably expands rather than trims back the Imperial presidency. Obama himself has reflected this pattern with his aggressive enhancement of the National Security Agency’s efforts to monitor electronic communications. For more than six decades, the war-making powers of Congress have been eviscerated by presidents of both parties. ( To take away a vital or essential part of: a compromise that eviscerated the proposed bill.) Which brings us back to Truman, who in 1950 balked at asking a Congress weary after World War II for approval to militarily respond to the Communist attack on South Korea. Dean Acheson, Truman’s secretary of state, claimed in his memoirs that a congressional debate over the Korean War “would hardly be calculated to support the shaken morale of the troops or the unity that, for the moment, prevailed at home.” Acheson may not have remembered that military morale and national unity are not mentioned in the Constitution. But the war-marking powers of Congress are at the heart of the nation’s founding document. It was as if the sign on Truman’s desk read, “The Buck Stops Here — And This Is Also Where the Constitution Is Twisted.” View gallery."Syria - History of politics and conflict from 1920 … March 8, 2005 - A Syrian soldier riding on top of a tank gestures after leaving his position, in Dah …The plain-spoken Truman resorted to weaselly words to claim that Korea was a United Nations-sponsored “police action” rather than a war. No other American “police action” has ever led to 54,246 wartime deaths. (To back out of a situation or commitment in a sneaky or cowardly manner.) Truman’s assertion of vast executive power as commander in chief set a template for future presidents. Even when presidents have gone to Congress for approval of major military engagements, these blank-check authorizations have often been based on deceptive arguments. Lyndon Johnson premised the entire Vietnam War on the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which was designed to permit a limited response to two minor and maybe mythical naval skirmishes with North Vietnam. Similarly hyperbolic were George W. Bush’s claims about Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. Even more legally dubious were all the times a president sent troops and planes into combat without anything more than desultory briefings of the congressional leadership. Ronald Reagan dispatched the Marines into Grenada in 1983 under the preposterous rationale that he was only protecting endangered American medical students. Bill Clinton skirted congressional approval for the 1999 airborne attacks to halt Serbia’s ethnic cleansing of Kosovo on the shaky grounds that this was a NATO operation. And Obama himself was even on flimsier footing when he justified America’s participation in the 2011 bombing campaign over Libya based on a United Nations resolution. But Syria did not provide Obama with any of these fig-leaf justifications. No American lives are in danger and the national security threat is hard to identify. Not only is NATO not participating, but also neither are the Brits, the United State’s closest diplomatic ally. With Russia serving as Assad’s enabler, there will be no Security Council resolution or U.N. mandate. Every time a president employs questionable legal arguments to wage war, it becomes a valuable tool for the next commander in chief impatient with the constitutional requirement to work through Congress. That’s why it would have been so dangerous for Obama to go forward in Syria without a congressional vote or the support of the U.N. or NATO. It is as much of a slippery slope argument as the contention that Iran, say, would be emboldened with its nuclear program if America did not punish Assad’s chemical attacks. Assuming Obama wins congressional approval, America’s coming attack on Syria is designed to set a lasting precedent: No government can ever again use chemical, biological — let alone nuclear — weapons without facing devastating consequences. As Obama asked rhetorically in his Saturday Rose Garden statement, “What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price?” But Obama’s decision to seek congressional approval may prove to be an even more important precedent. Future presidents — as they consider unilateral military action without American security hanging in the balance — will have to answer, “Why didn’t you go to Congress like Obama did over Syria?” Confronted with a series of wrenching choices over Syria, Obama chose the course that best reflects fidelity to the Constitution as written. Hopefully, in the days ahead, taking that less traveled road by presidents will make all the difference. ==== Analysis: Obama won't say it, but vote on Syria has high stakes for his presidency Sat, Sep 07 01:02 AM EDT image By Roberta Rampton and Caren Bohan WASHINGTON (Reuters) - It seems that everyone in Washington is talking about it except President Barack Obama: When Congress votes on the administration's request to use military force in Syria, the future of his presidency could well be on the line. A defeat, a distinct possibility, would hobble Obama in affairs both foreign and domestic, particularly if fellow Democrats collaborate in it. It will hurt him at a critical juncture, as he confronts not only Syria, but the nuclear activities of Iran and North Korea, another round of battles with Republicans over fiscal issues, an immigration bill, and a possibly difficult nomination fight over a new chairman of the Federal Reserve. Using Obama's presidency as an argument as Congress ponders a resolution authorizing military action is off-limits for the administration - it would make the debate about Obama and cost the president votes from some Republicans he is counting on. "My credibility is not on the line," Obama said at a news conference in Stockholm on Wednesday, five days after he announced he would seek congressional authorization for a strike on Syria over an August 21 chemical weapons attack in that country. "The international community's credibility is on the line. And America and Congress' credibility is on the line." ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM But if ever there was an "elephant" in a room, the Obama legacy is it. A 'no' vote would be a "catastrophe" for Obama, said David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official who is now president of Garten Rothkopf, an international advisory firm. "It would ratify the perception of him as a lame duck at one of the earliest points in recent presidential memory," Rothkopf said. "He would appear to be weakened and unlikely to get much done during the remainder of his term." "I think a 'no' vote would be a huge slap at the president," said George Edwards, a presidential scholar at Texas A&M University. "It would seem to tie his hands." It would hurt Obama even more if many Democrats - members of his own party - vote against him, which at the moment seems likely. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner in particular knows the consequences of being a leader with a diminished following. During the fiscal cliff confrontation in December, his fellow Republicans in the House defeated a proposal he thought might help resolve the fight over tax increases and heavy automatic spending cuts. Boehner has since taken a back seat in confrontations with Obama in part because he can no longer speak for his caucus in the House. Obama will confront a difficult challenge in October, when he faces Republican demands to make spending cuts in exchange for an increase in the nation's borrowing limit, the debt ceiling. He faces another potential fight if he nominates Larry Summers, said to be his current favorite to replace Ben Bernanke at the Fed. Bernanke's term ends January 31 and the White House has said an announcement on his successor is expected in the autumn. At stake domestically in the Syria vote is the president's "political capital," the influence that presidents gain with every victory and lose with every defeat, particularly if they have been personally engaged in the issue. IMPACT ON NEXT CRISIS Political capital is unquantifiable, and the impact on domestic issues a matter of speculation. The significance of defeat for Obama in the international sphere, beyond Syria, is more clear. Indeed, for Obama and his national security team, the vote on Syria appears to represent a desire to get a clearer fix on whether they can count on Congress if the Iranian nuclear standoff comes to a head or North Korea escalates its provocations to new levels, a U.S. official said. A congressional "no" vote this time around would weigh heavily against seeking congressional approval should Obama feel the need to use force again. Without reference to Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry has painted a dire picture in hearings on the resolution. A 'no' vote from lawmakers, he and other officials have argued, would embolden Iran and North Korea and make it more likely that a terrorist group might use illicit weapons. No one doubts that Republicans would use a defeat to their advantage. A central Republican critique of Obama is that he is a weak leader. A 'no' vote on Syria delivered in part by Democratic lawmakers would strengthen their argument, just as the administration is preparing for the fiscal battles of the autumn. While the administration has sought to divorce the issue from Obama personally, the stakes for his presidency are on the minds of many Democrats in Congress as they consider their votes. "Sure, you weigh that," California Democratic Representative George Miller, who has not decided which way to vote, told Reuters in an interview. "You obviously weigh that, but that cannot be the determining factor . ... Obviously, I want the president to succeed." But "when I run into my constituents," Miller added, "I've been asking them their opinion. They are very, very deeply concerned about any involvement by us there." (Additional reporting by Rachelle Younglai, Warren Strobel, Susan Cornwell, Susan Heavey and Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Fred Barbash and Peter Cooney) === Iran is America's real Middle East priority Fri, Sep 06 15:26 PM EDT image By Ian Bremmer While we've been distracted by a flurry of intelligence releases on Syria's chemical weapons strikes — and the ongoing saga over the United States' response — many have overlooked another intelligence report pertaining to weapons of mass destruction with severe implications for America's red lines and credibility in the Middle East. The International Atomic Energy Agency, the world's nuclear watchdog, reported that "Iran plans to test about 1,000 advanced uranium enrichment centrifuges it has completed installing." As Iran's enrichment capabilities increase, its breakout time — how long Iran would need to rapidly amass enough highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon — is dropping considerably. In the next year or two, Iran's breakout time could drop to about 10 days: too short of a window for the United States to reliably respond before Iran could secure enough material for a bomb. America's next step in Syria is inextricably linked to the situation in Iran. The U.S. government's biggest national security concern in the region is an Iranian regime with potential access to nuclear weapons. A nuclear Iran would destabilize the region, shock oil prices, and threaten U.S. allies. Longer term, it's harder to map out the implications, but they aren't pretty. A nuclear Iran could trigger a domino effect among Middle Eastern countries; should another Arab Spring occur, a failed state with a nuclear weapons cache is a frightening prospect. Not intervening in Syria — letting Bashar al-Assad cross Obama's red line of using chemical weapons on civilians — makes any red lines regarding Iran's nuclear progress blurrier. In fact, by punting the decision to Congress and further complicating the causality between a broken red line and punishment, Obama may have already done just that. It's a quirk of history that Obama is in this position in the first place. When Obama originally set his red line back in August 2012, he caught his advisers completely off guard. As the New York Times reported in May: Moving or using large quantities of chemical weapons would cross a "red line" and "change my calculus," the president declared in response to a question at a news conference, to the surprise of some of the advisers who had attended the weekend meetings and wondered where the "red line" came from. With such an evocative phrase, the president had defined his policy in a way some advisers wish they could take back. If Obama set the red line without consulting his own staff, he certainly didn't ascertain whether other nations would also "change their calculus" in response to chemical weapons use. That helped lead to the embarrassment in Britain last week, when the House of Commons declined to join any potential American strike against Syria. This is possibly Obama's hardest-earned lesson of the Syria debate thus far: even if you feel the need to tout American exceptionalism, don't let it apply to your red lines. If you set a red line by yourself, be prepared to defend it alone as well. Let that be a lesson on Iran. With the recent IAEA report suggesting that Iran is inching ever closer towards nuclear breakout capacity, potential upcoming negotiations with Iran carry an even greater urgency than usual. And there are compelling reasons to be optimistic (or at least less pessimistic than usual): both parties have something that the other wants, and Iran has a new president. In June, Hassan Rouhani won the Iranian presidential election with an outright majority — as a centrist candidate with a platform of patching up relations with the West. Ahmadinejad's retirement is perhaps an even greater addition by subtraction. While it's important to remember that the buck stops with the Ayatollah, Rouhani's election could usher in a reset in negotiations, and perhaps a modest deal, likely in the form of inspections and a slowdown in enrichment in return for reduced economic sanctions. The United States needs to seize this chance. If negotiations fail, it could still prove difficult to maintain the current level of sanctions pressure for two reasons. First, because Iran now has a charismatic president instead of one who's easy to hate and speaks out against Israel. Second, Rouhani is bent on promoting transparency and efficiency in the Iranian domestic economy. This makes it more tempting for countries like China, India and Russia to strike deals with Iran — even if it means bending the rules on sanctions. As the United States has witnessed in Syria, it's hard to hold the international community to a strict red line — especially when there are economic incentives to the contrary. So what's next in Syria? It's more likely than not that Congress will approve a limited military strike — and that the ensuing intervention will prove to be limited. If Congress rejects the president's call for a military strike, it will set a dangerous precedent on American red lines and undermine the United States' credibility in advance of possible talks. If Obama's proposal does pass and the U.S. strikes, the administration must prepare for the risk that Iran will respond with escalatory asymmetric attacks, and it must ensure that any fallout from Syria does not scuttle upcoming nuclear negotiations. A few months from now, in all likelihood, the U.S. will once again be on the sidelines in Syria, decrying continued violence with rhetoric but little action. Media attention will shift to the high stakes dynamics with Iran. It is, after all, where the U.S. government has been focusing all along. (Ian Bremmer is the president of Eurasia Group, the leading global political risk research and consulting firm. Bremmer created Wall Street's first global political risk index, and has authored several books, including the national bestseller, The End of the Free Market: Who Wins the War Between States and Corporations?, which details the new global phenomenon of state capitalism and its geopolitical implications. He has a PhD in political science from Stanford University (1994), and was the youngest-ever national fellow at the Hoover Institution. ) (Any opinions expressed here are the author's own.) === Top News Obama plans 'full-court press' to sway Congress on Syria Sat, Sep 07 00:52 AM EDT image By John Whitesides and Richard Cowan WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama will take his case for military action in Syria directly to the American people next week, stepping up his campaign to convince a deeply skeptical Congress to back strikes against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces. Obama's address to the nation from the White House on Tuesday will be part of a rejuvenated lobbying effort on Syria as Congress returns to Washington next week. A Democratic congressional aide said the administration is planning "a full-court press" aimed at undecided lawmakers. Speaking in Russia at the conclusion of the G20 summit, Obama acknowledged on Friday he faces an uphill fight to build public and congressional support for a military response to the Syrian government's alleged use of chemical weapons. Early vote counts in Congress do not look encouraging for Obama, with scores of lawmakers still undecided about whether to authorize a military strike after the president said last week he would seek their approval. Opinion polls show a war-weary public strongly opposes U.S. action in Syria. "In terms of the votes and the process in Congress, I knew this was going to be a heavy lift," Obama told reporters in St. Petersburg. "I understand the skepticism. I think it is very important, therefore, for us to work through, systematically, making the case to every senator and every member of Congress. And that's what we're doing," he said. Administration officials have given public testimony and daily closed-door briefings on Syria this week to members of Congress, who remain concerned that even limited strikes could draw the United States into a prolonged war and spark broader hostilities in the region. The briefings will resume on Monday, and the White House hopes support will grow as more members of Congress get classified briefings. Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi, known for her ability to gather votes in her caucus, told Democrats in a letter on Friday there would be two meetings next week of Democratic members with White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough. "There will be a full-court press from the administration and those undecided Democratic members in particular are going to be getting multiple calls from administration officials, including the president," a Democratic Senate aide said. "Every undecided vote is going to get a lot of attention from both the leader (Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) and from the White House," the aide said. According to a Washington Post count, only 23 senators have been willing to go on record in favor of military force, while 17 are against. It will likely take 60 of the Senate's 100 members to advance the measure to the House of Representatives. In the House, where 218 votes will be required to pass the resolution, only 25 members are on record in support of military action so far, according to the Post, with 106 opposed. Democratic aides who support strikes have dismissed the numbers as meaningless, saying many lawmakers have not attended any classified briefings. Others noted lawmakers often wait until the last minute to decide, in part because they want to see what others are going to do. SENATE DEBATE NEXT WEEK The Democratic-led Senate convened for slightly more than four minutes on Friday, ending the month-long summer break, in a procedural move that will help speed consideration next week of the measure authorizing military action against Syria. A Senate debate will begin next week, with a first full Senate vote possible on Wednesday. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee narrowly approved on Wednesday an authorization that prohibits the use of U.S. combat troops on the ground in Syria and limits the duration of the action to 60 days, with one possible 30-day extension. Obama said he is striving to convince lawmakers the response in Syria will be limited "both in time and in scope" but still meaningful enough to degrade Assad's capacity to deliver chemical weapons and deter their use. "What we're describing here would be limited and proportionate and designed to address this problem of chemical weapons use," Obama said. "And that is going to be the case that I try to make, not just to Congress, but to the American people over the coming days." Obama also has had trouble rallying international support for a military response to the August 21 chemical weapons attack on Syrian civilians. The British Parliament voted last week against Britain's participation in the action. Obama said that most leaders of the G20 countries agreed that Assad was responsible for using poison gas on civilians, although there was disagreement about whether force could be used without going through the United Nations. He said he did not believe U.N. Security Council support was required. "Given Security Council paralysis on this issue, if we are serious about upholding a ban on chemical weapons use, then an international response is required, and that will not come through Security Council action," he said. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power said on Friday that Assad had barely dented his stockpile of chemical weapons in last month's attack near Damascus, and that Assad knew Russia would back him in the controversy over chemical weapons. "We have exhausted the alternatives" to military action, she said at the Center for American Progress think tank in Washington. Obama declined to say whether he will proceed with military action against Syria if U.S. lawmakers vote against his plan, despite earlier comments from a top aide suggesting he would not use such force without congressional support. "The president of course has the authority to act, but it's neither his desire nor his intention to use that authority absent Congress backing him," deputy national security adviser Tony Blinken told National Public Radio on Friday. Obama rejected criticism that he was playing politics by asking Congress for authorization, and acknowledged that Syria's use of chemical weapons was not a direct threat to the United States. "I did not put this before Congress, you know, just as a political ploy or as symbolism. I put it before Congress because I could not honestly claim that the threat posed by Assad's use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians and women and children posed an imminent, direct threat to the United States," Obama told reporters. "In that situation, obviously, I don't worry about Congress; we do what we have to do to keep the American people safe," he said. (Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, Patricia Zengerle, Roberta Rampton and Mark Felsenthal; Editing by Karey Van Hall, Jim Loney and Claudia Parsons)