These Troops Are Not for Sale (Open Thread)

or rent

Flickr_-_The_U.S._Army_-_Spotting_enemy_troops - Copy

Yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.  Without apparent shame, he made the most amazing admission:

Operation Enduring Freedom

[emphasis added to quotes]

Secretary of State John Kerry said at Wednesday’s hearing that Arab counties have offered to pay for the entirety of unseating President Bashar al-Assad if the United States took the lead militarily.

“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear costs and to assess, the answer is profoundly yes,” Kerry said. “They have. That offer is on the table.”

Asked by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) about how much those countries would contribute, Kerry said they have offered to pay for all of a full invasion.

“In fact, some of them have said that if the United States is prepared to go do the whole thing the way we’ve done it previously in other places, they’ll carry that cost,” Kerry said. “That’s how dedicated they are at this. That’s not in the cards, and nobody’s talking about it, but they’re talking in serious ways about getting this done.

Got that?  This Secretary of State dickers with Arab nations to sell (or rent) our brave troops AS IF they’re mercenaries for hire to the highest bidder!

A game of chicken – US and Afghan troops take back road held by Taliban

They spend their treasure; we spend our precious blood.

What a deal!   We risk our best and brightest.  They risk … What?

Sorry, Secretary Kerry:

These troops are not for sale, or hire, or rent. None of them signed up for this.

I can write that statement without taking a poll because I’m that positive that our troops and their families would be outraged to hear this proposal.

Isn’t it wonderful that the Arab sheiks, awash in oil wealth, are willing to pay for the entire “invasion”, if only OUR PRECIOUS TROOPS would fight their war for them? Why is this?  Because Muslims won’t kill other Muslims, so they must hire infidels to get ‘er done?  Six degrees of separation from the killing?  Don’t want to get their own hands bloody dirty?

Kerry said this without any apparent sense of shame. This from a man who’s currently arguing that our credibility and standing in the world is on the line.

And yet, here’s Kerry, pimping out our troops for hire because his Dear Leader has so destroyed our economy and starved our military that we must go begging to the Arabs to fund “our” wars.  What does that do for our standing in the world?

This very commentary telegraphs to the world exactly whose war this is.  It tells us  upon whose behalf Obama and Kerry plan to commit our troops to war.  It tells us for whom they are going into harm’s way. mccain-poker - Copy

Obama and his supporters in Congress gamble with the lives of our troops, while they play games.

John McCain, played video poker during a Senate hearing about Syria, prompting this  chastisement:

Gold Star mother Debbie Lee fired back …

“It infuriates me,” she said. “We are facing the possibility of sending our sons and daughters to a war, conflict, military action or whatever politically correct term you use – an action that could change the world as we know it – and McCain couldn’t care less.”

Lee is the founder of America’s Mighty Warriors, a non-profit focusing on Gold Star moms. She lost her son, Navy SEAL Marc Alan Lee, in Operation Iraqi Freedom, on August 2, 2006.  …

“McCain is so bored that he needs to play poker on his iPhone and then when caught jokes about it. How disgraceful! …

I’m sorry the lives of our brave warriors who are fighting for our freedoms bore you. I’m sorry my country, the country my son died for, bores you. I’m sorry that the risk of war bores you. Senator, it is time for you to resign your position as my Senator.”

What’s the real reason we “must” attack Syria?  It cannot be because Assad allegedly used chemical weapons.  100,000 have already died, and there was no serious attempt for us to openly intervene in a civil war “to save lives.”  There are no good guys in that civil war.

I write allegedly with regard to blaming Assad because we still don’t know exactly who is responsible for this alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria.   Obama’s administration argues that it must have been Assad, because, they claim, the rebels don’t have such weapons.  Well, the Russians beg to differ:

Russia says it has compiled a 100-page report detailing what it says is evidence that Syrian rebels, not forces loyal to President Bashar Assad, were behind a deadly sarin gas attack in an Aleppo suburb earlier this year. … 

Russia said the report had been delivered to the United Nations in July and includes detailed scientific analysis of samples that Russian technicians collected at the site of the alleged attack, Khan al Asal.

Russia said its investigation of the March 19 incident was conducted under strict protocols established by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international agency that governs adherence to treaties prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. It said samples that Russian technicians had collected had been sent to OPCW-certified laboratories in Russia.

That story relates to an earlier chemical weapons attack in Syria, not the one that took place on August 21, 2013, which is Obama’s justification for going to war against Syria.  However, it clearly puts the lie to the administration’s contention that the rebels don’t have chemical weapons.

If that’s not enough, there’s this:

6 June 2013

Russia has called on Turkey to share its findings in the case of Syrian rebels who were seized on the Turkish-Syrian border with a 2kg cylinder full of [the] nerve gas sarin.

Russia’s top foreign official Sergei Lavrov today said the Kremlin wanted to get clear on the issue of chemical weapons used in Syria, since the allegation had taken on the role of a trading card in the conflict, becoming a focus of constant provocations.

I do not rule out that some force may want to use it [the rumour] to say that the “red line” has been crossed and a foreign intervention is needed,” the minister said.

“We are still waiting on a comprehensive report from our Turkish colleagues,” he added, citing the incident when a gang of terrorists carrying a canister with nerve gas sarin was arrested inside the Turkish territory about two weeks ago.

Got that?  Syrian “rebels” (most of whom are associates of Al Qaeda or some other jihadist group) were caught in May 2013 carrying sarin gas. That would have been just about three months prior to this most recent chemical weapons attack in Syria–the one being blamed on Assad because, as the Obama administration claims, it must be him because nobody else has such weapons.  Right?  Wrong.

But let’s hurry and pass a resolution in Congress and attack, before the UN and the Russians have time to finish their reports on this most recent attack–the one being blamed on Assad.

Could there be another reason for the rush to judgment?  Consider this, which is being discussed in the blogosphere.  (h/t Kathy)  From a UK news story dated January 29, 2013:

Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad’s regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.

A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme ‘approved by Washington’ is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.

Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons against its own people.

According to, the December 25 email was sent from Britam’s Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

It reads: ‘Phil… We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

‘We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.

‘They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

‘Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

‘Kind regards, David.’

Britam Defence had not yet returned a request for comment to MailOnline.

Several thoughts on the above exchange:

First,  if you read the Russian report, cited above, you will see that the Russians identified the source of the Aleppo attack (which took place in March 2013) as coming from the rebels because of the type of rocket (or rocket propellant) used.  Therefore, it would be important, in a false flag operation, to make sure that the weapons match what Assad allegedly has.  

Second, note that Qatar (an ARAB) country, allegedly would fund the operation, with “sums” that are “enormous.”

Third, note the need to have a videographer on site.  After the alleged August 21, 2013, chemical attack in Syria, a huge number of videos were nearly immediately posted on the Internet, alleging to prove that the government of Syria attacked its own citizens with chemical weapons.  Most major mainstream news organizations picked up these video and still photos, which were supplied to them by the rebels or by “activists” (like Doctors Without Borders) and they  proceeded to publish them.  In some cases, the news agencies claimed to have vetted the images, but how could they do so?  How would they authenticate such images, which must be approached with extreme skepticism, especially when one considers the Muslim concept of taqiyya?  Many thinking folks have since noted that these images and videos are suspicious, especially with regard to the  number of people handling the victims without wearing gloves or respirators to protect themselves from deadly contamination.  As Judge Andrew Napolitano said,

Never mind that the photos shown by Mr. Obama’s folks of aid workers ministering to the supposed victims of government gassing show the workers without gas masks or gloves, and never mind that the Assad regime has permitted United Nations weapons inspectors unfettered access to its materiel, and never mind that the president wants to invade Syria before the weapons inspectors issue their report. The president wants us to think that the Assad regime intentionally gassed 1,000 Syrian innocents who were of no military value to the rebels or threat to the regime — and among whom were, according to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, “hundreds of children.”

Even if all this took place as Mr. Obama claims, can he lawfully bomb Syria to punish its government for violating international norms or to deter it from doing so again? In a word: No.

Finally, while Infowars notes that Britam admits that they were hacked, they did imply that the emails are not authentic.   Nevertheless, it’s an interesting story because of the odd similarities to what was allegedly proposed and what has come to pass.  Then there’s Obama’s “red line.”

A story at Free Republic, cited above, asks WHY Obama mentioned his red line in the first place, seemingly out of the blue, during an “impromptu news conference” on August 20, 2012, nearly a year to the day before the actual chemical weapons attack:

President Obama said … that any attempt by Syria to move or use its chemical weapons would change his administration’s “calculus” in the region, evoking the possibility of more direct U.S. intervention in the conflict.

Speaking at an impromptu news conference at the White House, Obama noted that he has not authorized military operations against Syria. But he said that any effort by President Bashar al-Assad to use chemical weapons would have significant consequences.

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us  . . . We’re monitoring that situation very carefully. We have put together a range of contingency plans.

The president’s remarks represented his strongest language to date on how the United States might respond to contain Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal. In July, he warned that Assad would be “held accountable by the international community” if he made the “tragic mistake” of deploying chemical munitions. …

[A]n administration official said that Obama did not intend to flag any change in policy in his latest remarks and that the appetite for military intervention remains low. …

The United States has been working with allies in the region to develop contingency plans against worst-case scenarios, such as deployment of chemical weapons. The planning has included detailed arrangements for securing chemical arms with Special Operations troops in the event that they are seized by militants.

Speaking after a summit with Turkey’s foreign minister, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said this month that officials were seeking to coordinate efforts.

“We need to get into the real details of such operational planning. It needs to be across both of our governments,” she said.

Clinton added that the prospect of Syria’s use of chemical weapons was particularly troublesome.

“What would that mean in terms of response, humanitarian and medical emergency assistance, and, of course, what needs to be done to secure those stocks from ever being used or falling into the wrong hands?”

U.S. officials have said that they are working with Turkey and Jordan to monitor Syria’s chemical weapon sites and have been in discussions with Israel on what steps must be taken to ensure the sites are secure. …

Turkey!  The very country that allegedly was used as a conduit for (illegal) weapons intended to arm the Syrian “rebels” through our assets in Benghazi, Libya, potentially precipitating a state attack on our CIA “mission” in September 2012, only weeks after Obama drew his “red line” in the sand.

Thus, four dead in Benghazi. RIP.  Will We the People EVER learn the truth about Benghazi?  (btw, touching upon yet another Obama scandal, the IRS scandal also featured an “impromptu” press event, when Lois Lerner blew the whistle on herself by answering a planted question.)

Keep in mind that the chemical weapons that Assad possesses very likely came from the store of WMDs that Saddam Hussein allegedly did not have when the USA took action to enforce 17 UN resolutions Hussein ignored, but only because he had already sent them to Syria!

Fast forward to September, 2013.  The UN, thus far, is not supporting action against Syria.  Nor is Russia (of course). Nor is the UK, our formerly staunchest ally.  Nor is Germany.  What European country is on board?  France.  Take note of this, from August 2012, a year ago:

French President Francois Hollande warned Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday that any use of the country’s chemical weapons would be a legitimate justification for military intervention. …

The comments followed U.S. President Barack Obama’s warning to Syria on August 20 that military intervention could be justified if al-Assad’s government used unconventional weapons or moved them in a threatening fashion.

“What’s at stake goes beyond Syria. It concerns the security of the Middle East and especially Lebanon,” Hollande said.

What a coincidence that Hollande echoed Obama last year and now he’s the only European leader openly supporting Obama today.

No boots on the ground “for combat operations.”  That’s what the resolution passed by the Senate committee says; and yet the contingency plans specify a need for as many as 75,000 ground troops to secure those WMDs.

800px-thumbnail - Copy

Of course, they’ll have to be dropped in there, somehow.  Prepared to lose more helicopter crews?  More Navy SEALs?

A limited cruise missile strike, we’re told. Nope. If that doesn’t do the trick, why then they’ll call out the big guns–the B-52s and the B-2 stealth bombers–putting our pilots in harm’s way.

U.S._Airmen_with_the_148th_Fighter_Wing,_Minnesota_Air_National_Guard_disembark_a_C-17_Globemaster_III_aircraft_after_arriving_at_Kandahar_Airfield,_Afghanistan,_Aug._10,_2012_120810-F-VN552-006 - Copy

Already, our Navy is in harm’s way, out there in the Mediterranean, like sitting ducks.The_guided-missile_destroyer_USS_Michael_Murphy_(DDG_112)_sits_at_its_homeport_of_Joint_Base_Pearl_Harbor-Hickam,_Hawaii_121219-N-RI884-004 - Copy

But I’m not the only one who was immediately outraged by what Kerry said yesterday (which of course goes virtually unreported by the mainstream media).

Jonathan Turley wrote about Kerry’s “free war“:

This week Secretary of State John Kerry became the Sham-Wow man for the latest war by the United States. Here is how a Sham-War pitch works. Kerry announced that the Arab countries will pay for our entire war if we invade Syria. That’s right, we can simply rent out U.S. personnel like mercenaries for Saudi Arabia and Gulf nations. …

The clear suggestion is that we might be able to go to war on a Saudi credit card . . . if we act now. Indeed, as Congress contemplates whether it would buy a war for zero down, Kerry could offer to get a second war at the same cost.

What is astonishing is that the offer of a free war was viewed as Kerry as a positive contribution to the pitch for war.

It’s seldom that Turley and I are on the same page.  Take it from me.  I find it “astonishing,” to say the least.

We can only hope that more open-minded individuals from all parts of the political spectrum ask the right questions before Obama takes us into yet another Middle Eastern war.

Kerry083013PIX2 - Copy

Before we Lurch to Damascus, let us all remind Obama and Kerry:

These troops are not for sale or rent.


136 responses to “These Troops Are Not for Sale (Open Thread)

  1. I agree with Ted. 🙂

  2. Watch this. 🙂

    will air on the “Charlie Rose Show” Monday night — the same day as President Obama’s recorded interviews with six networks. Portions of the interview will also air on Monday’s “CBS This Morning,” and other platforms across CBS News.

    Rose previewed the interview on Sunday, speaking on the phone from Beirut. He told Schieffer that al-Assad “denied that he had anything to do with the attack.”

    Rose traveled to the palace in Damascus for the sit-down. He was accompanied by Jeff Fager, the president of CBS News. The interview comes as the White House attempts to make the case for U.S. military intervention in Syria.

  3. This nun is not the only one saying this, that the chemical attack is fabricated. She’s studied evidence and is turning in her report. Please read, pass it on:

  4. ~ SO…. Are O’s Sarin Videos ??? ProP-A-Gand-A???

  5. My post about that nun, I don’t know about that person. If it’s a she, must be a heavily testosterone-induced female that had injections, or it’s a male.

  6. Rosemary Woodhouse

    Re: Jealous…..why do so many of the black people look so white? “Colored” is a perfect word, and yet it’s been banned as racist. There is nothing black about most African Americans. Africans, yes- many countries/people/tribes are indeed black. But African Americans, no.

  7. Absolutely have to share this video with WTPOTUS bloggers. It is appropriate for this section “Our troops”. Check out the body language of Mc Cain as he is drilled about the govt.’s treason by a vet at a town meeting. This video brought tears to my eyes. Stay alert everyone!

  8. Sorry, I left the video out of my post!

    Hope this has not been posted already. If so, enjoy a repeat since the message is spot on!
    Wish I knew how to embed the video. If you want to help me out with this Miri (or anyone) I’d appreciate it!!!

  9. Hey, Yahoo! It embedded, my friends!

  10. How dumb does the mainstream media think we are?
    First we are asked to believe that Kerry made an offhand remark yesterday in London.
    Debka has been reporting this offer by Putin for svereal days.
    A day before Kerry went to London:
    Assad hints he is weighing a secret new US proposal pushed by Europeans
    DEBKAfile Special Report September 8, 2013, 10:45 PM (IDT)
    Tags: Syrian war, US military action, diplomacy, Bashar Assad, Barack Obama,
    Bashar Assad interviewed by PBS

    In an interview with Charlie Rose to be aired by US PBS Monday night, Sept. 9, Syrian President Bashar Assad denied he had anything to do with the chemical attack last month near Damascus. He also suggested that he was not necessarily expecting the United States to intervene…

    This remark, say debkafile’s intelligence sources, was the most telling phrase in the interview. It was a hint that the situation had opened up and that something new was afoot.
    Our sources report that the Obama administration apparently delayed military action against Syria to put before the Syrian ruler a secret new proposal for discussing an end to the crisis. The European powers are pushing hard for this option. So Bashar Assad may be holding the key to whether or not the US goes forward with an attack on Syria. On the other hand, the door on US military action has not yet closed.
    The slowed-down momentum toward military action was also noticeable in the remarks heard from US Secretary of State John Kerry after he lobbied European leaders to back US action against Syria.
    A few days before that Russia suggested moving the weapns to Iran.
    So why would Putin rescue Obama from political disaster.
    Gee! That’s a hard one!
    Could it be because Obama is Putin’s man in the White House –
    the man whose real agenda is to weaken the US as much as possible?
    I think the preferred plan was to involve America in another doomed adventure in the Middle East to further break the spirit of our people.
    But when Putin saw the plan wouldn’t work, he needed to save his agent who might still do some useful work in the furture.
    Hence the surprise concession springs out.
    Well. at least it is good if we don’t help Al-Qaeda win yet another country
    but really! we are not that stupid.
    Wonder what that list server, journo-list is saying today?
    They’re all worthless.

    • “Tell Vladmir I’ll have more flexibility after the election”

    • And let’s not forget that meeting that was supposedly not to happen on account of Snowden–Barry met with Putin “privately” in plain sight for 20 minutes in a corner at the meeting in St. Petersburg. While Kerry and the State Dept. are claiming it was NOT a real proposal, just a “throwaway line” or an “off the cuff” remark and NOT a proposal (much less a serious one), Obama is undermining his own Sec. of State by saying the opposite–that it was his idea and he discussed it with Putin in St. Petersburg and that he always wanted a different solution to his problem. However, WHAT HAPPENED TO HIS RED LINE and his insistence that Syria MUST BE PUNISHED? This doesn’t punish Syria, but it sure helps Barry out of his self-dug hole. I heard Judge Napolitano again on radio this morning. He said this:

      1. It’s contrary to international law to attack Syria, even if only with a few missiles. That’s an act of war and it does NOT in any way meet the 4 conditions that must be met under international law. IF Barry attacks Syria, then he becomes a war criminal who can be pursued FOR LIFE on charges of violating international law.

      2. Syria NEVER signed the treaties against the use of chemical weapons. Got that? That means that Barry’s argument (lame, at best) that he must break international law in order to enforce international laws is itself a LIE. If Syria’s not part of the convention drawing that red line, then Syria, even if they used the weapons in a civil war, did NOT break any law or treaty because as a sovereign country, they never put themselves under those prohibitions.

      3. So in this situation, Syria will give up its legal chemical weapons but the USA, which is signatory to the anti-chem-weapons treaty, will not. Is that fair?

      4. Nobody attacked the USA when its government used chemical weapons against its own citizens in Waco, TX, killing 72, INCLUDING MANY WOMEN AND CHILDREN.

      5. Funding the rebels is funding Al Qaeda-connected terrorists and THAT is a federal crime, too.

      I find all of that very interesting. It’s pretty sad when Assad and Putin end up looking like better statesmen than Obama and Kerry. What a couple of rodeo clowns. And they wonder why our stature in the world is sinking.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s