Purplehood wrote:There is not a single objective that is listed above that can be quantifiably defined and given to our Armed Forces as Mission Objectives. ...
Obviously, everyone is not really reading what I wrote or the links I provided.
I said that I agree with the open letter I linked to that included the objective: "to deter or destroy the Assad regime’s airpower and other conventional military means of committing atrocities against civilian non-combatants."
I think former U.S. Gen. Jack Keane makes a compelling case for decisively taking out Syria's air force and air capabilities (
reference video). He said:
U.S. Gen. Jack Keane wrote:The most vulnerable military capability he has, Bret, is his air power. There’s 20 air fields, only six of them are primary. He only has about 100 aircraft. We can take down those air fields, the aircraft on them. Also, the munitions, the fuel, the warehouses that the Iranians and Russians are using to resupply them, we can do all of that. That would be a significant degradation of his capability, and something he isn’t bargaining for. He is not expecting to lose his air power over the use of chemical weapons.
Granted, Russia has now said they will resupply then with whatever we destroy, but that's another issue.
As for those asking "who are we to punish?
First, I'll refer back to President Reagan's actions when Libya engaged in terrorism back in the mid-1980's. Wisely, he did not overreach by launching a policy of regime change (leave it to Obama to do that bonehead move), instead he launched a bombing campaign to severely punish Khaddafi. Plenty of historical info on that
here. There is even a really good article on that subject as it relates to us now here:
'86 Attack on Libya: A Template for U.S. Action Now.
And second, what ever happened to us being a "shining city on a hill"? When this evil and corrupt world will not stand up for what is right, who else will (or can) if we don't? We have lost our way as a nation. We have become complacent and "tolerant" of way too many evils. The President is right when he says that it is not just his red line, but it was the worlds red line. The problem is that the Islamists have successfully made the world fear them, so much so that the world would rather take the easy way out since it doesn't directly and immediately affect them. But just like a parent who has to discipline their child, if you do not follow through with your "red lines", then they will grow up to be uncontrollable teenagers that will only cause you more problems...and then on to lawless adults that still act like children.
Anyone who thinks the use of chemical weapons (again, by either the government or the "rebels") in some civil war in a far off country won't affect us is a fool. I'll say it again...if we do nothing, we should expect them to use WMD more often, against more targets and to kill more people.
