Putin Didn't Save Obama, He Beat Him

With the Russian proposal on Syrian chemical weapons, the United States is being escorted out of the Middle East.

Maybe Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin really did discuss the idea of putting Syrian chemical weapons under international control last week on the sidelines of the G20 conference. Putin sure doesn’t care that Obama’s taking credit for the proposal, or that the administration is posturing like a Mob enforcer.  “The only reason why we are seeing this proposal,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney, “is because of the U.S. threat of military action.”

Right, Putin is laughing to himself. Whatever. If Obama wants to sell it like a Christmas miracle on Pennsylvania Avenue that’s fine with Putin, because Putin won.

Reset with Russia was originally a strategic priority for the Obama administration because it saw Moscow as the key to getting Iran to come to the negotiating table. Putin, from the White House’s perspective, was destined for the role of junior partner. Now Putin has turned “Reset” upside down. By helping Obama out of a jam with Syria, Putin has made himself the senior partner to whom the White House is now beholden. Accordingly, when Putin proposes the same sort of deal with Iran, with Russia having established its bona fides as an interlocutor for Syria, Obama is almost certain to jump at it.

What’s unclear is whether Obama understands that his foreign policy legacy will be to have ruined the American position in the Middle East, our patrimony of the last seven decades. If the 1979 takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran signaled weakness, the Russian deal screams surrender. The real surprise is that it’s not Iran kicking the United States out of the region under Obama’s watch, but Putin.

Via: Weekly Standard

Continue Reading....

Obama struggling to win support on Hill, world stage for Syria strike

The specter of defeat is starting to hang over President Obama’s drive to win congressional backing for a Syria strike, as his team struggles to win rank-and-file support in the House – with even top ally Nancy Pelosi saying she’s not sure she can round up a majority of her caucus.

The president is not doing much better 5,000 miles away, seemingly running into a wall -- and Vladimir Putin -- during his brief visit to St. Petersburg, Russia, for the G-20 summit as he tries to sway allies to back his plan.

Speculation is swirling that the president may address the nation in the near future, as Congress takes up legislation authorizing the use of force. But for now, lawmakers say their constituents are overwhelmingly against military action in Syria – a fact they weigh heavily as they consider how to vote.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., one of the biggest advocates for military action on the Hill, acknowledged in an interview with Fox News that he’s not at all certain there are 218 votes in the House for the resolution to pass. Informal tallies show only a few dozen members of the House have come out for military action.

"It is up to the president to be much more forceful and not seem like he is trying to pass the buck on to someone else," King said.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

13 Relevant Reports at AP's National Site Fail to Quote Obama's 'I Didn't Set a Red Line' Statement

Yesterday in Stockholm at the G20 summit, President Barack Obama said the following in regards to the use of chemical weapons in warfare: "I didn't set a red line. The world set a red line." For years, the press obsessed over the alleged untruthfulness of President George W. Bush's "16 words" ("The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa") in his 2003 State of the Union address. Today, the Associated Press won't even directly quote the first six of Obama's.

Regardless of whether one thinks that Obama's statement is an attempt to abdicate personal responsibility for his original "red line" (i.e., in the sand) statement a year ago or an assertion that his year-ago statement merely affirmed what the rest of the world believes, it's news, and should be presented to the nation's readers and viewers in quotes. But not at the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, which is barely recognizing the existence of the "red line" at all.

Here are relevant passages from an AP report on yesterday's war resolution committee vote in the U.S. Senate currently time-stamped early this morning by Donna Cassata with the help of eight other AP reporters:

DIVIDED VOTE FORESHADOWS OBAMA CHALLENGE ON SYRIA

... Speaking in Sweden on Wednesday, Obama left open the possibility he would order retaliation for the deadly chemical weapons attack even if Congress withheld its approval. "

I always preserve the right and responsibility to act on behalf of America's national security," he told a news conference. In a challenge to lawmakers back home, he said Congress' credibility was on the line, not his own, despite saying a year ago that the use of chemical weapons would cross a "red line."

The Senate panel's vote marked the first formal response in Congress, four days after Obama unexpectedly put off an anticipated cruise missile strike against Syria and instead asked lawmakers to unite behind such a plan.

Via: Newbusters 

Continue Reading....