Who knows if Keynes really said the famous, perhaps apocryphal quote, “When the facts change, I change my mind. what do you do, sir?”
Here’s another historical excerpt from the World Food Situation, House of Commons Debates, 31-MAY-1946:
1.43 p.m. Miss Colman (Tynemouth) : … I did not say I had repented, I have not; I have merely changed my view, and for this simple reason, that the facts of the situation have changed. Those people who are incapable of changing their views when the facts change are extremely rigid in their mental make-up….”
And Handle has done likewise. Suffice it to say that I have only recently seen what a reasonable person should expect to see before one should be willing to commit to armed attack. It’s a shame the case cannot be tried in open court, but that’s how it goes sometimes.
Bomb away boys, and may your arrows fly straight and true.
P.S. The fact that Syrian Regime has not, to my knowledge, made any of the seductive defenses I was able to propose in a manner of minutes probably demonstrates that they lack … how shall we say this … a very deep bench. They could use a few more good lawyers over there in their active measures bureau, but it’s just as well for the allies that their smart fraction is especially fractional.
Handle's Haus 
What do you imagine will be accomplished by the use of the Tomahawks?
Just what the President said, actually.
1. Obama blows up some of Assad’s expensive strategic-capability things.
2. Things Assad finds particularly valuable and threatening to others.
3. But which he’s not really using now very much (so it shouldn’t change the short-term operational situation)
4. Things the allies would rather nobody who takes over Syria have anyway.
5. Which will coerce Assad into conducting the next phase of the battle for the major contested city in the Northwest in a conventional manner, keeping his hands off his behind-top-shelf special reserve.
6. In this way, USG enforces the Marquess of Queensberry rules on the fight, and achieves a desired objective, without directly participating. Yes, if a soccer referee throws up a Red Card, it indirectly helps the other team, but the point is to police the game.
7. So you don’t see a civil war escalate into a chemical holocaust as the Alawis conclude, justifiably, that they’ve got nothing to lose.
lol wut
Would you mind sharing with the hoi polloi this vision you’ve had?
Obama wants to back down and punted to Congress. Let him. I’m hardly a fan.
VOTE NO. And yes contact your CongressCritter. Even the Supreme Soviet had a few cards to play.
Handle are you under the impression when we kill it’s more photogenic?
Sometimes ….
As to the Gas: What does it matter now?
Tease trolling?
No. Sorry for being terse, but it’s been busy lately. More to follow. Stay tuned.
I don’t know if any of the many explosions I’ve seen were cruise missiles. However you may be assured that’s it’s not so pretty up close.
I don’t like chemical warfare, or population centric warfare whether it’s Mao or COIN.
However the effects of say burning or shrapnel that doesn’t kill quickly are probably as horrible as chemical warfare. Certainly burns.
This assumes the regime is guilty. I must say I don’t care. I’m not Syrian. However if they killed that many so quick that’s tremendous competence created in a near vaccuum. Compared to say the British in WW1, the masters of chemical warfare. Yes we’ve had 95 years since. But that’s in labs for the most part.
Fortunately the President has deftly Rooked to Congress. Brilliant, and Bravo.
They don’t want to do it either.
If Syria were an actual sovereign country, their government would have no need for a ‘seductive’ verbal defense: it would simply point a finger at its fleet of nuke subs, ‘Bulavas’ at the ready. With a wink and a nod. But as things are, to the victor go the spoils (Zbigniew Brzezinski’s ‘controlled chaos.’ Don’t think the Russians don’t know the actual long-term purpose of the engineered ‘Arab Spring.’ Every kid over there knows.) And to the muppets playing at sovereignty go… well, the Tomahawks.
All true and well said, my friend, as usual.
But the Assad regime is now barely maintaining sovereignty over its own military and certainly not over 80% of the land area of what we used to call Syria; parts of which we should now call “West Anbar” and “West Kurdistan” and “East Beirut-istan”.
The Alawis always had trouble allocating funding, equipment, and training between their immediate domestic concerns and their strategic foreign obsessions. They were much better prepared for war against Israel than to fight off their own Sunni Mujaheddin. So, because you ‘go to war with the Army you’ve got’, they’re very tempted to fight the latter with the deterrents of the former.
If they fear the massacre of their sect (and they’ve got good reason to), then a total loss means genocide, and they might as well fight to the bitter end with everything they’ve got.
If the Sunnis don’t want to get slimed, they should be offering generous terms as to the details of their future rule of their minorities. The problem is that they cannot do so credibly, because everyone believes they are bloodthirsty zealots and fanatics.
I wonder where they got that idea?
Pingback: Why Bother with Syria? | Thedening the West