Thursday, September 5, 2013

Global SITREP A27-13: How Stupid is Bashar al-Assad?

Al-Kibar September 2007: Before (left) and After (right)

05 September 2013: This Saturday marks the 6th anniversary of Israel's September 7, 2007 destruction of Bashar al-Assad's attempt to complete the construction of a North Korean-designed nuclear reactor known as Al-Kibar. Al-Kibar was to have been a plutonium reactor for the specific purpose of producing weapons grade fissile cores for nuclear weapons. This is particularly relevant today in that the question posed by many media pundits of late relates directly to "How Stupid is Bashar al-Assad."  As this timely Israeli-preempted endeavor amply illustrates, Bashar al-Assad has already proven beyond any doubt that he and his closest allies and advisors are absolutely capable of being in the category of world-class tin-foil hatter stupid.

The recent question whether or not Bashar al-Assad would be as stupid with his existing and quite considerable chemical and biological weapons as he was with his desire for nuclear weapons capability is, as former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld would likely have framed it, "a known known."  Of course he would and will use these weapons of mass destruction, otherwise there would be no purpose in his possession of them. This is true of all nations which possess such weaponry. If a human being or a group of human beings possess a club, or a stick and a stone, or a bow and an arrow, or a bullet and a rifle, or a rocket with a WMD warhead -- it will be used. This logic has been proven throughout the course of human history. However, the more radical, the  more fanatical, or ideologically or apocalyptically motivated that group of human being is towards their enemies the more the likelihood increases for the use of their most fearsome weapons against their enemies. This is not rocket science. It is fact, Biblically prophetic fact at that.

I have just made the case for a full-scale, no holds barred preemption of both Syria's and Iran's weapons of mass destruction capabilities before they can use them against their enemies. That means us. All sides in the current conflict appear to have adopted the conclusion that the coming war in the Middle East is an inevitability; that there is no chance of walking this one back; that an object in motion tends to stay in motion. So if its war, then we have no other option but to ensure that we dictate its outcome in advance. 

My previous arguments pointing to why our going to war have been based upon falsehoods have fallen upon many deaf ears and blind eyes. These leaders believe they can manage this coming war like one manages the harvesting of turnips from field to truck to market. They are fools. World-class. The first thing that happens in any war is that all plans and anticipated management techniques are killed off in the first engagement with the enemy. And that is saying a lot because based upon the briefing our top military commander gave to various Congressional committees in the past day we have no established warfighting objective here; we're going to be winging it freelance style.

Now I say we must execute this war as the image above indicates Israel executed its preemption of Bashar al-Assad's nuclear ambitions -- leave absolutely nothing but flattened, glass-encrusted dirt and be done with it. Given the manner in which Obama has rundown and castrated our military forces in the past five years anything less than this guarantees that my young sons and your young sons (and daughters) are destined to be boots on yet another Middle Eastern battlefield because current conditions guarantee a re-institution of a military draft. Another Middle Eastern battlefield is the last place I want any of them to be in because it is hell.


Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, Sean, this isn't really about WMD's use, as far as Obama is concerned, this is just another distraction so he can get his Amnesty legislation, debt-ceiling raised and anti-2nd Amendment legislation through, while the American people are watching the fireworks. Attacking Chemical weapons sites of Assad's and not the rebels', will serve only to allow the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qeada forces, that account for a large percentage of the rebel forces in Syria, to take control of the country, and they have vowed that when they get control to then deal with Yisra'el. But if we did attack both sides' chemical and biological weapons stores and capabilities, it is highly unlikely we could take them all out in the first wave of attacks, and there is a very good chance Assad will elect to use the remaining weapons on Yisra'el, rather than allow them to be destroyed. Also, there are still nearly a hundred thousand surface to surface conventional warhead missiles that can be quickly pointed in Yisra'el's direction and fired. You would know better than I, but I've heard rumors that Hezbollah has Chemical tipped SCUDs, so we would have to get the Rebels', Hezbollah and Assad's WMD's and take out Iran nuclear program. I could be wrong, but without a very large coalition of allies, I don't see the U.S. Military have the capabilities to prosecute such an ambitious campaign, to any real degree of success. Then there are the Russians and Chinese that will raise 9 kinds of heck over what they will call - Open Aggression! I hear the Russians have dispatched a carrier group to be stationed off the coast of Syria, even as I type this.

I agree with your assessment, for the most part, and ideally, we should go all out on Iran 1st, to destroy its nuclear program and cripple its offensive capabilities, then zap all Chemical and Biological weapons in the Syrian theater of conflict. But I simply don't think we can pull this off alone or even with France's help, and I truly believe that Assad and Iran will follow through with their threats to attack Yisra'el if we attack Assad. If that happens, it could quickly escalate in all directions. If we have allow Assad to have these WMD's all this time, I don't know if it is worth the risk to attack them now, and if this turns out the way I think it could, the empty aspirin and powdered milk factories in Syria should have their insurance paid up now! Knowing how the Obama administration operates, do you really think this attack is about trying to take out Assad's WMD's. I guess I am cynical, but I think this is merely a waste of taxpayers' money to stroke Obama's pride, and no real intensions of stopping the use of WMD's by anyone!


Maranatha! Mark

Drew said...

You know, as a student of history I have always been fasinated by the beginnings of WWI in 1914. I had wondered how the assassination of a second tier member of the Hapsburg royal family in what was then a backwater place like Sarajevo led to the entire world at war and the terrible carnage of the trenches. The answer I have discoved is that all of the world's major powers had backed themselves into a corner with their political alliances and games of one-upmanship so that by the end of 1914 the die was cast and millions lost theie lives.

I see alot of parallels with the situation today. Political alliences have been drawn and everone is manuvering so that any little miscalculation or one small occurance and everyone will lose the dogs of war. I hate it, but I can see it as clear as day. I am praying that the world will come to it's senses, but I have my doubts. May the Lord's will be done.

Sean Osborne said...

I have to disagree Mark, this absolutely is about the deployment of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war.

Without the chemical attack in the Jobar suburb of Damascus on 21 August there is not even the remotest possibility of US/Western intervention in the Syrian civil war. Obama and his Islamist Turkish allies have been looking for an excuse to intervene for a long time now, and that brings me to the following point...

The most troubling and distressing thing in all of this is that Russian Federation President and former-KGB man Vladimir Putin is telling the truth that the Islamist rebels were responsible for the Jobar chemical attack, while Obama and SECSTATE Kerry are lying through their teeth saying that Bashar al-Assad's government was. My previous SITREPs explain this lie in detail.

The sorry fact is that Obama and Kerry are lying now about Syria in the same outrageous manner as Obama and Hillary lied to us about Benghazi.

And about the rebels...

The rebel faction fighting against Bashar al-Assad's rule is 80% composed of Jabhat al-Nusra and Al Qaeda terrorists - that's 4 out of 5 rebel commanders are Islamic terrorists. The remaining 20% of the Sunni and secular Arab insurrectionists in Syria who are actually Syrians have no choice but to go along or find themselves missing all body parts above their shoulders.

The best that I can say at this point is that I PRAY that about 100 members of the House of Representatives vote NO on POTUS' request for use of force authorization. That way Obama can be held accountable and impeached when he exceeds his authority as defined by the U.S. Constitution and the U.S.C. 50 which legally defines the War Powers Act.

The US must stay out of the Syrian civil war at all costs under the present circumstances because it is a lose-lose situation guaranteed.

Sean Osborne said...

Drew... spot on Bro, excellent analysis!

This is worldly insanity that none of us want any part of.

Therefore MANARA THA!!!

Drew said...

Sean, I know that this is in the Lord's hands, but I am intrested in your opinion. Do you think that even if congress refuses to grant it's approval for a proposed Suria strike, Obama would go ahead and do it anyway? His comments about his not needing approval has me wondering. I am somehow getting the mental image of America being drug into this by a hook in the jowls (even though I don't believe America is the country Ezekiel was referring to)!

Sean Osborne said...


Based upon everything that I have learned about the man over the past seven years and everything he has actually done over the past five years, my answer is absolutely YES, I would expect him to ignore the expressed will of Congress should he lose the use of force authorization vote.

However, also based upon the Constitution and the law as defined by the War Powers Resolution (defined in law by 50 U.S.C. 1541-1548) I would also expect someone in Congress to IMMEDIATELY introduce a motion for the impeachment of the President of the United States.

This law is inviolable in that it limits the power of the President in his role as Commander-in-Chief to committing the United States Armed Forces to hostilities under three specific circumstances:

(1) a declaration of war by Congress,

(2) a specific statutory authorization by Congress,


(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

At the present time President Obama does not have any of these three circumstances supporting a decision by him to commit hostile acts against any belligerent in the Syrian civil war.

Scipio said...

Sean, agreed. However the media and congress too, are so reprobate and spineless, that an impeachment would be 'Republican lies' to frame our president? Just sayin...

Ben D said...

If i understand you correctly Sean, you accept the chemical weapon attack that is being blamed on Assad by the Obama admin., was in fact carried out by the rebels, but nevertheless call for an all out strike.

It is my understanding that the means to an end is not substantially different from the end, or in other words, one reaps what one sows. The very idea that peace can come from a warlike act somehow doesn't ring true with me, despite the ever persuasive propaganda of those powers who need the democratic majority 'green light' to justify it.

Sure, this is not heaven here and I accept that my view is little related to the way this world works in these dark times, and though I do expect the prophetic war that is coming, I would be reticent to urge the starting of it.

Sean Osborne said...


To be perfectly clear...

Based upon the intelligence information that has been posted to this blog, I hold 99.99% confidence that the jihadist rebels carried out the 19 March 2013 chemical attack in Khan al-Assal (near Aleppo) as well as the 21 August 2013 chemical attack in the Jobar/Ghouta suburb of Damascus. They have done this in order to create a red-line crossed and precipitate Western/US intervention against the Syrian government.

On this basis and on the legal basis of the Constitution and War Powers Act of 1973* (*see my response to Drew above) I am against President Obama launched an attack solely against the Syrian government.
I also opposed a strike because I know that Russian volunteers are manning Syrian air and coastal defense sites, and in that role they are serving as a trip wire no different than how our 28,000 troops in South Korea are serving as a trip wire against North Korean aggression.

However, in spite of all this, if the President goes ahead and puts our sons and daughters in harms way against the wishes of we their parents, relative and fellow citizens, then I say we must go in whole-hog for their sake alone and let those chips fall where they may.

This isn't about achieving peace, and we cannot achieve peace in a long-term religious war between Sunni and Shi'a/Alawi Muslims. But we can get them to stop fighting by breaking all of their military hardware and removing the weapons of mass destruction from among their warfighting capabilities.

An action like this just might prevent a larger regional war for the time being, and just like you I would really not like to see us as being responsible for a very nasty and insane regional war because we intervened with something worthless like a tactical pinprick.

We are in this situation because We The People ostensibly elected a man who was totally unqualified and unprepared for the power that he holds. Therefore We The People have to see this through and then correct our error as expeditiously as possible for the sake of all.

Ben D said...

Well said Sean, I generally agree with everything you have stated, and in particular the responsibility to accept our government's decisions of the day, despite our personal misgiving as to their wisdom.

I had not considered it in the light you 'shine' on the situation and can now understand where you are coming from. Yes, the children of man should not die in endless political wars in vain, the real war is coming sooner or later and sfaic, the sooner the better. And I respect the obedience of all citizens of all nations, to their respective governments decisions.

The time is near...

mark3210 said...

So now that Obama has found his Russian escape hatch where do we go from here?

I think Israel is going after Iran sometime in the next 3 months. But then again I've felt such action was imminent for years and we're all still waiting for it.

Sean Osborne said...


Ok, after putting some thought and study to this latest turn of events here's what I think might happen next.

Since the Sunni rebel false flag operation has apparently failed to get the US directly involved, their next logical course of action is to precipitate Israeli involvement by using their chemical weapons on a large scale against Israel. I think they have captured enough Syrian weaponry to pull such an attack off.