So, the Obama Regime is back to this line again? Even though the one time they might have been able to carry it out themselves - Operation Don't Mock Me almost three years ago - they chickened out and punted Syria to....Vladimir Putin? Who now controls Syria and through whom they would have to go to force Assad out?
Or is this more "tough diplomacy" horsebleep?
I can't keep track of this nonsense anymore:
[Commissar] of State John Kerry warned Syria’s government and its backers in Moscow and Tehran on Tuesday that they face an August deadline for starting a political transition to move President Bashar Assad out, or they risk the consequences of a new U.S. approach toward ending the five-year-old civil war. [emphasis added]
Is this meant to sound ominous, must less intimidating or threatening?
But given the various, unfulfilled U.S. threats throughout the Arab country’s conflict — from declaring Assad’s days “numbered” five years ago to promising military action if chemical weapons were used — it was unclear what effect Kerry’s ultimatum might have.
It's not unclear at all - Vlad will laugh until he pisses himself. Then he'll take a deep breath and laugh until he craps himself. Then he'll take another deep breath and laugh until he passes out. Then he'll wake up, take ANOTHER deep breath, and laugh until he pukes.
And it’s unlikely that the Obama administration, so long opposed to an active American combat role in Syria, would significantly boost its presence beyond the three hundred special forces it has authorized thus far in the heart of a U.S. presidential election season. More feasible might be U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia giving the rebels new weapons to fight Assad, such as portable surface-to-air missiles.
Which will make not the slightest bit of difference, and would probably wind up in ISIS's arsenal anyway, like all U.S. weapons seem to do.
“The target date for the transition is 1st of August,” Kerry told reporters at the State [Commissaria]t. “So we’re now coming up to May. So either something happens in these next few months, or they are asking for a very different track.”
"Target date" doesn't sound like "deadline," does it? I have no idea of Lurch is trying to sound intimidating, but if he is, he can't even get the nomenclature right.
Regardless, this is what you get when you make clear in advance that you will never use force under any circumstances: You lose all deterrent capability because nobody takes you seriously. That's why pumping the air full of words is useless without demonstrating the ability to put action behind them.
Let's go down the list of just how thoroughly The One has stripped the U.S. of any clout or influence in the Middle East:
Syria is in a military alliance with both Russia and Turkey. We’ve estranged Israel. Iran is committed to propping up the Assad regime. If Saudi Arabia becomes involved it will be to arm ISIS to keep the Iranians at bay. The alliance with Russia ensures UN sanctions are off the table. Europe doesn’t trust us and they damned sure aren’t going to do anything that would provoke Assad into creating more "refugees".
In fact, when we last tried this a) we actually had some clout, b) the president made the threat, and c) nothing happened. That Kerry thinks we are in a stronger position today than five years ago can only be put down to his cycling shorts being too tight.
In fact, I don't know why Thurston stays in the job. Hell, I don't know why we even have a State Commissariat, we've become so invisible and irrelevant. Is it just to allow the Boston Balker to build up his frequent flier miles? Or does he just enjoy playing pivot-man in those Iranian circle-jerks too much?