« | »

Panetta: US Needs ‘Permission’ To Intervene

From Obama’s palace guards at CNN:

Official: Panetta misinterpreted on ‘permission’ for Syria intervention

By Chris Lawrence, CNN
Thu March 8, 2012

(CNN) — The Pentagon tried to clarify remarks made by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, when he told a Senate committtee on Wednesday that the U.S. military is seeking "permission" from a foreign organization to intervene in Syria.

"He was re-emphasizing the need for an international mandate. We are not ceding U.S. decision-making authority to some foreign body," a defense official told CNN.

Ever notice how our mainstream media only ever report bad news about the Obama administration after they can first present the White House’s side of things?

In testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Panetta had an exchange with Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, who said Congress was circumvented when Obama decided to join the NATO coalition in Libya.

Sessions said, "We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?"

Panetta replied, "You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress."

In other words, if the US would intervene in Syria, the Obama administration first would seek a "legal basis" from the international community, including the UN and the Arab League. But it would only "inform" Congress what they were doing. It would not seek permission from them.

Latching onto the words "permission" and "inform," Sessions ripped into Panetta: "Well I’m troubled by that. I think it does weaken the ability of the United States to lead. I do think ultimately you need the legal authority from the United States of America, not from any other extra-territorial group that might assemble."

But even when Sessions gave Panetta a chance to clarify, Panetta continued to say the U.S. would seek "permission" so that there was a legal basis to act.

Because Panetta simply cannot even imagine anyone having any problem with this worldview. But the US does not need any legal permission to act in its national interests. Which is something you would hope a US Secretary Of Defense would realize.

Just as you would hope that a former Congressman, which Panetta is, would understand Congress’s role in such military decisions.

"I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat," Sessions said. "I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution." …

After the hearing, Sen. Sessions told Security Clearance in an interview that Panetta’s comments were "very revealing of the mindset" of the administration. Panetta "seemed so natural in expressing it as if he didn’t understand this went against" the fundamentals of our government…

And Senator Sessions is exactly right.

The defense official, who did not identify himself because he did not want to speak publicly for the secretary, further explained the rationale for seeking international agreement.

"The legitimacy is greater if there is some form of international mandate. There’s a sense that unilateral U.S. action would be perceived in the wrong way, especially in this part of the world. Does the U.S. want to go it alone in another Arab country? That figures into the calculus."

The official said a United Nations Security Council resolution, like the one that authorized action in Libya, isn’t necessarily the only way to go about this. "Some kind of mandate from a regional organization could signify this is not just a unilateral effort on our part," he said. This is important not only to the U.S., but to other nations in the region that oppose al-Assad’s regime, the source said.

The official also emphasized that international agreement is just one of the concerns. The other part of the equation is the Syrian military and dense population centers, which are big factors in any military intervention, said the source.

"The complexity of that cannot be overstated. This is a very hard problem set we’re dealing with."

You see? We rubes are just too stupid to understand Mr. Panetta’s nuanced position.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, March 8th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

14 Responses to “Panetta: US Needs ‘Permission’ To Intervene”

  1. tranquil.night says:

    Hear that, anti-war Left? “They told me if I voted for Mc-” ah, whatever, we all understand what the Demonize Bush years were about. If not for the double-standar, they wouldn’t have one at all. Heh, that is indeed a solid line.

  2. GetBackJack says:

    When they come for your guns give’em the bullets first.

  3. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    This is just incrementalism in action. The one-world socialists are patient if nothing else. We let Obama violate the War Powers Act in Libya and now a precedent has been established. Meddling in affairs of other nations has always been a progressive ideology going back to Roosevelt’s great white fleet. Ironically article2(4) of the UN Charter, the group liberals love so much, strictly forbids other nations from intervening in affairs that are within the jurisdiction of sovereign nations. But the UN like all progressive/socialist groups follows their golden rule; do as I say, not as I do.

    • Mithrandir says:

      I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

      Magna Carta 2012 Without any fine, imprisonment, and automatic removal from office, there is no law public officials need to respect. There is no mechanism keeping them from honoring their Constitutional requirements. Until you gather together and enforce another affirmation of rights, and enforceable punishment for those who do not respect them, you will never have secure rights from your public abusers. ~just sayin’

  4. Tater Salad says:

    Beginning in 2013 when Barack Obama and his communist regime are left in the cold without any jobs and power, the United States should round up everyone of his self appointed Nazi regime and deport them to a country that would have them. Finding one would be the problem.

  5. canary says:

    The only way the U.S. could intervene in the Syria winter is by air strikes so since when do they need permission.

    al-Qaida has been streaming into Syria last few weeks.

    Russia is for keeping Assad leader.

    Obama already said he didn’t want to intervene so acting like we can’t get permission is a cop out.

    • canary says:

      oh. I get it. Russia is helping Syria and aiding Iran

      Isreal Defense: Russia Helps Syria to Upgrade Radar

      In the framework of the preparations for an Israeli attack in Iran, Russian experts have recently helped Syria upgrade its long-range radar systems, in order to provide Iran with an early warning

      by Arie Egozi Mar 7 2012

      The upgraded radar covers a wide area in the eastern Mediterranean sea, and can detect aerial activity up to ranges of hundreds of kilometers. Special sites in Syria that are fully or partially manned by Russian operators, primarily near Tartus Port, are involved in the Syrian effort to sound an early alarm against any aircraft on their way to attack Iran.

      Russia claims that it has developed the capability to detect stealth aircraft by positioning several radars in a certain area.

      entire article

    • canary says:

      Syria’s Deputy Oil Minister Announces Defection (Reuters-Guardian-UK)

      Syria’s deputy oil minister, Abdo Hussameldin, has announced his defection on YouTube.


    • canary says:

      Reuters: Netanyahu’s Gift to Obama: Tale of a Persian Plot

      Mar 5 2012

      WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu handed President Barack Obama a gift on Monday that spoke volumes about Israel’s tensions with Iran – an ancient Hebrew tome about a Persian plot to annihilate Jews.

      It’s called the Scroll of Esther, a tale of palace intrigue featuring a Jewish beauty who charms a Persian king into foiling an evil adviser’s genocidal plans for her people some 2,500 years ago.

      “Then too, they wanted to wipe us out,” Netanyahu told Obama, according to an Israeli official.

      “And the Jews smote all their enemies with the stroke of the sword, and with slaughter and destruction, and did what they would unto them that hated them,” one of the verses says.

      (Writing by Jeffrey Heller; editing by Todd Eastham)

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Obie will not read that. He doesn’t have the ability to absorb the meaning, the depth and the gravity of it. Or, simply put, he thinks Netanyahu is just a “filthy stinking Jew” anyhow and it went from his hands to the dumpster at light speed.

    • canary says:

      Rusty, you have to appreciate the humor in Israel’s leader Netanyahu giving Obama the book as a gift.

      Netwanyahu has surely read Obama’s powerful Jew hating friends and Church and several years of Obama insults.

      I’d love to know the message Netwanyahu wrote when he no doubt signed and dated the book to the dear Osama Obama. No doubt Obama will have a book burning with his friends.

    • canary says:

      No doubt Netanyah read Obama’s Dreams & Hope as each country’s leader has. Especially, the part where Obama got mad and pushed his white girlfriend when she confronted him of his overbearing hatred of white people. She pointed out the what the Jews and the Holocaust went through and Obama
      implied blacks in America had it worst. Poor girl cried her eyes out saying stuff I wish I could be black for you, but I can’t. boo hoo. boo hoo. She dodged a bullet and should be glad he dumped her.

  6. Tater Salad says:

    Jane Fonda Lives in the White House

    Farid Ghadry Blog

    When Senator McCain was captured, imprisoned, and tortured by the North Vietnamese, Jane Fonda, the extreme left anti-war activist, visited Hanoi in support of the North Vietnamese Government fighting US troops in Vietnam. Upon her return, she talked of how well-treated US POW’s were. Later, McCain contradicted Fonda’s statements by stating he was tortured because he refused to meet with her. Fonda responded by calling McCain a “Hypocrite and a liar”.
    To further highlight the Fonda tragedy, on August 3, 1995, the Wall Street Journal published an interview with Bui Tin who served on the General Staff of the North Vietnam Army. In the interview, Mr. Tin highlighted the importance of the anti-war American movement on college campuses and how cardinal it was to Hanoi’s central plans for victory. “It was essential to our strategy” he said during the interview.

    Besides Senator McCain’s valor on the battlefields, his multi-faceted experience including his firsthand knowledge of violent dictatorial regimes, and his understanding of the minds of Americans who apologize to our enemies and who fall prey, because of their naïveté, to their deceptions makes him better suited for any foreign policy initiatives than the current lot. Considering how stubborn Obama has been to act against the Iranian regime in 2009 and the Syrian regime in 2011, we have a Hanoi Fonda in the White House.

    As an American-Syrian and an active civic-minded voter, I am one to believe that we either vote for great Presidents or some awful ones. The in-between Presidents we vote for pave the way for a better or worst Presidency.

    Having said that, the US is going through an awful presidency today that bows to corrupt rulers and apologizes to US enemies. I can see Senator Obama flying into Damascus and then returning home to defend Assad the way Pelosi and Kerry did before him and the way Fonda defended North Vietnam against her own government. I personally think J. Edgar Hoover was born a tad too early.

    President Obama is as naive as Fonda was during the Vietnam war but with an infinite capacity to harm US interests because of his stubborn beliefs he can negotiate any problem no matter how deceptive his enemy is. And when all else fails, just bow low to America’s enemies in the hope our President can claim to be victorious.

    Senator John McCain of Arizona has far more experience as Commander-in-Chief than the current President because of his war record. Maybe then our President should listen to his advise and adopt his experience in the field of dealing with repressive regimes built around a communist ideology of terror.

  7. canary says:

    Obama’s Islam a religion of peace is insane. It never was and never will be. Very long article on the radical Islam’s trying to overthrow Syria. A no win situation.

    ForeignPolicy: Islamism and the Syrian uprising

    by Nir Rosen Mar 8, 2012

    James Clapper, the United States Director of National Intelligence, warned last month of al Qaeda taking advantage of the growing conflict in Syria. The Syrian regime and its supporters frequently claim that the opposition is dominated by al Qaeda-linked extremists.

    Syria’s uprising is not a secular one. Most participants are devout Muslims inspired by Islam. By virtue of Syria’s demography most of the opposition is Sunni Muslim and often come from conservative areas. The death of the Arab left means religion has assumed a greater role in daily life throughout the Middle East… But as the conflict grinds on, Islam is playing an increasing role in the uprising.

    Mosques became central to Syria’s demonstrations as early as March 2011 and influenced the uprising’s trajectory, with religion becoming increasingly more important. Often activists described how they had “corrected themselves” after the uprising started. Martyrs became important…

    The sheikhs described the youth as thugs.” Revolutionaries threatened Sheikh Hassan Seyid Hassan, Arbeen’s top cleric, saying they would break his car and burn his house and office. In a sermon he apologized for condemning the uprising.

    …The young men, and some were boys, had come under the influence of Salafi jihadist clerics and were blamed by the regime for an attempted attack on the state television headquarters. “Here the main reason we came out was to demand the release of our prisoners” one local leader said. “We are religious and that’s why we are oppressed.”

    Near Harasta, in Duma, I met with Abu Musab, an insurgent commander. He claimed he had been fired from his job as an imam for “speaking the truth” and talking about dignity. The strict Hanbali school of Islam dominates Duma and not a single woman can be seen on its streets without her face fully concealed by a burqa. Piety was one of the reasons why Duma was so revolutionary, he told me….He took me to a funeral for two martyrs of the revolution, one of them an armed fighter. As the crowd of hundreds left they chanted, “The people want a declaration of jihad!”

    The insurgent groups’ names are increasingly Islamic…

    …1980s a radical group that found the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood (SMB) too moderate split off and called itself the Fighting Vanguard. They were responsible for much of the violence that was blamed on the Brotherhood that traumatizes Syrian society to this day,…

    … “A proof of that is that the Islamist cells dismantled by the authorities over the last decades were linked to the Islamic Liberation Party or to Jihadi networks,….

    “The revolution in Syria today has nothing to do with the MB of the 1980s,” he said, but he told me that the SMB was involved in the current uprising…… And if the Lebanese Brotherhood is doing it, it is with the cooperation of the Brotherhood of Syria.”

    “The Brotherhood is not like they were in the past,” said one leader of the Homs Revolutionary Council (HRC) who receives money from them among many others….

    Abu Abdu, a field commander who deals with military and civilian elements of the opposition in the Damascus suburbs told me that he had received calls from people in Jordan, Turkey, London, and the United States who belonged to the Muslim Brotherhood. “People offer us money but there is a hidden agenda to it and we refuse it,” he said. “This is a popular revolution, I work for God and the nation. I come out against oppression.” He picked up his cigarette pack. “I’m not going to replace Marlboro with Gaullois.”

    “The U.S. won with an alliance with the Brotherhood in Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt” he said. “America cooperates with the Brotherhood. But the alliance has to be studied. This alliance is failed.

    Before the revolution many of Anadan’s youths were accused of Islamic extremism and arrested. One Friday in February demonstrators shouted, “the people want a declaration of jihad!”

    …the opposition’s Faruq Brigade sent messages to the Muslim Brotherhood complaining that the Brotherhood was smuggling weapons into Homs but hiding them or burying there. “They avoid to use their weapons now to fight and we are afraid that they want us to defeat the regime and then they will use their arms when we are tired.”

    In late December, some men belonging to Hizbultahrir tried to raise the black and white flag of Islam in the Inshaat neighborhood of Homs. They also distributed leaflets in Inshaat saying it is religiously prohibited to deal with the Americans or ask for support from NATO, people should only depend on God.

    … some Islamists think we have to depend only on god and call on jihad.

    The Syrian uprising’s reliance on outside help will only increase radicalization.

    … one activist told me. “Each month that goes by the movement turns more Islamic and more radical Islamic. If it had succeeded in April or May of 2011 there would be more civil society.”

    Before the December 23 attacks a senior western diplomat told me that al Qaeda was in Syria and he was very worried they might conduct attacks. Syria was a major source of jihadists and suicide bombers in Iraq, as even Syrian security officials often admit.

    It is enough to create a sense of occupation. Occupation is a major cause of suicide attacks.


    The Fate of Syria: “Cut Into Pieces and Thrown in the River”

    by Raymond Ibrahim March 8, 2012


    Should “rebels” get their way and topple the Assad regime, the same brutal pattern experienced by Iraq’s Christian minorities will come to Syria, where an anti-Assad Muslim preacher recently urged Muslims to “tear apart, chop up and feed” Christians to the dogs.

    Christian minorities, who, as 10% of the Syrian population, have the most to gain from a secular government and the most to suffer from a state run by Islamic Sharia law, have no choice but to prefer Assad.

    Accordingly, it is understandable that, as an earlier report put it, “Christians have mostly stayed away from the protests in Syria, having been well treated and afforded a considerable amount of religious freedom under President Assad’s regime.”

    And who are these “rebels” who see and treat Christians as sub-humans to be exploited and plundered to fund the “opposition” against Assad? Unfortunately, many of them are Islamists, internal and external, and their “opposition” is really a jihad [holy war]; moreover, they are acting out anti-Christian fatwas that justify the kidnapping, ransoming, and plundering of “infidel” Christians.

    And why shouldn’t they be? Wherever Arab tyrants have been overthrow—Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, and so on —it is Islamists who are filling the power-vacuums.

    Raymond Ibrahim is an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »