Obama won't use military strike to oust Assad

[ProSense]

Obama won't use military strike to oust Assad

Aamer Madhani, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — As President Obama weighs with his national security team how he will respond to Syria's suspected use of chemical weapons, his chief spokesman said Tuesday that the actions Obama is contemplating won't lead to the ouster of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

The White House continued to publicly maintain Tuesday that Obama has made no decision on the nature of his response to the Assad regime, even as lawmakers and government officials warned that a limited military strike against Syria is imminent.

<...>

"I want to make clear that the options that we are considering are not about regime change," Carney said while reiterating that Obama continues to believe the 2½-year conflict must end with Assad out of power. "They are about responding to a clear violation of international standard that prohibits the use of chemical weapons."

Pressed by reporters on why Obama has ruled out using U.S. action to topple Assad, Carney responded, "It is not our policy position to respond to this through regime change. We will take an appropriate response, and the president and his team are evaluating the options to them. And the president will make an assessment and an announcement in due time."

- more -

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/08/27/obama-wont-topple-assad-with-strike/2709717/

[geek tragedy]

1. That was techincally the approach in Libya as well . . . nt

[cali]

3. yep.

[leveymg]

10. In the beginning, maybe. But, when the time came to take Sirte, bombing helped do a lot of this:

From this:

To this:

[Harmony Blue]

2. Most people are againt any military strike

way to miss the point.

[trumad]

4. Yeah---let's throw a couple of Cruise Missiles at him..

but hope we don't hit him.

Love you Pro---but this will piss me off something fierce if he hits them.

[Harmony Blue]

7. If the military strikes the U.S. is proposing

involves military targets, infrastructure and other key public buildings well what does that leave?

[BeyondGeography]

5. Basically what Cameron's saying

http://news.sky.com/story/1133706/pm-syria-action-would-be-to-stop-chemical-use

[Laelth]

6. Weak sauce. n/t

-Laelth

[Just Saying]

8. I don't want to see our forces in another war

And certainly don't think we should get involved in civil wars. But it is hard to see chemical attacks on civilians. I'm not sure what we can do to help them since anything we do is tainted in that region anyway. Very sad situation.

[leftstreet]

9. That headline is DoublePlusGood BULLSHIT

Not yours, the article

The article only states the WH isn't looking for 'regime change.' It doesn't state a military strike won't be used. Just no 'regime change'

[kentuck]

11. I agree with you ProSense...

on a rare occasion.

If Assad cannot give us the name or refuses to give us the name of the culprit that set off the poison gas, then he may closer to collapse than we think?

Maybe someone in the military is calling the shots? Maybe Assad is a weak leader and the military pays him little mind?

Maybe one of the "rebels" got hands on some poison gas and brought it into the country? Perhaps from Libya?

Discretion is the better part of valor at this time, in my opinion.

[progressoid]

12. Well, that's comforting.