Syria: the case for action

[jmm99]

The WH may see in the two recent polls the light shining at the end of the tunnel. In any event, the WH momentum has not lessened.

US prepared to strike Syria despite rebuke from Britain, White House officials say (NBC News; by F. Brinley Bruton and Erin McClam, August 30, 2013)

White House officials are signaling that President Barack Obama is prepared for the United States to strike Syria — after a rejection from the British Parliament and in the face of deep reservations in Congress.

An NBC News poll released Friday found that an overwhelming majority of Americans, roughly eight in 10, want the president to seek approval from lawmakers before any attack on the Syrian government for its apparent use of chemical weapons.

The poll found that support among Americans is higher for a limited military strike, such as cruise missiles fired from Navy warships in the Mediterranean Sea. But half of Americans are opposed to any military attack on Syria.

What the WH is looking at is not the 80% wanting congressional approval, but the 50% who support limited strikes. IMO: President Obama is looking at the same thing; and if ill-advice is occuring, it is presidentially self-made. In addition, the polls over the last several months have shown an increase in the percentage approving limited strikes.

Syria Poll Finds Little American Support For Air Strikes (by Emily Swanson, Posted: 08/28/2013):

Americans largely oppose any U.S. intervention in Syria's civil war, according to a new HuffPost / YouGov poll, with only a quarter saying they support air strikes there.

The new poll, conducted after U.S. officials claimed Syria's government killed thousands of civilians with chemical weapons, shows 25 percent of Americans now support air strikes to aid rebels in Syria, while 41 percent said they are opposed. Another 34 percent said that they're not sure.

Support for air strikes has risen since two previous HuffPost / YouGov polls. A poll conducted in April found found that 16 percent of Americans supported air strikes. A poll in June found 19 percent supported air strikes.
...
The 59 percent of respondents who said they believe Syria has used chemical weapons against rebels there were about evenly divided on whether the U.S. should conduct air strikes, with 37 percent in support and 38 percent opposed. Twenty-six percent were unsure. The June HuffPost / YouGov poll found that a plurality of those who believed Syria has used chemical weapons were opposed to air strikes, 49 percent to 29 percent.

Respondents to the latest poll were divided over whether the U.S. has a responsibility to prevent the Syrian government from using chemical weapons. Thirty-one percent said it does, 38 percent said it does not, and 31 percent said that they were unsure.
...
Two other options for intervening in the Syrian conflict were even less popular than air strikes. Sending U.S, troops to aid the rebels was opposed by a 65 percent to 11 percent majority of respondents, while providing weapons to rebels was opposed by a 49 percent to 13 percent plurality.

The WH has looked at the trend line - increasing in support for limited strikes; as well as the large undecided percentage and the increased support for strikes among those who believed that the strikes were Assad ordered.

The NBC poll simply verifies that view, NBC poll: Nearly 80 percent want congressional approval on Syria (NBC News; by Mark Murray, Senior Political Editor, August 30, 2013):

Nearly 80 percent of Americans believe President Barack Obama should receive congressional approval before using force in Syria, but the nation is divided over the scope of any potential strike, a new NBC News poll shows.

Fifty percent of Americans believe the United States should not intervene in the wake of suspected chemical weapons attacks by Syrian President Bashar Assad, according to the poll. But the public is more supportive of military action when it's limited to launching cruise missiles from U.S. naval ships - 50 percent favor that kind of intervention, while 44 percent oppose it.

Thus, the NBC poll gives the White House a "mandate" to go ahead with limited strikes. A long holiday weekend might just be the best political time to do that.

Finally, in answer to Jon's question about what Assad will do, I can only say what I'd think I'd do in an existential situation for me and my supporters. I'd continue with my plans and kill as many enemies as possible. I'd be in an Iwo Jima situation, where the Japanese general did the best he could under the circumstances. Surrender was not an option.

Regards

Mike