Syrian AUMF; a slight fisking, interrogatives, with a side of snark

You can get the complete unsalamandered version here, but who is game for a quick and dirty reading of the draft AUMF. I want to put on my full Planner hat with this as my POLMIL guidance, but I don't have time for that. Instead, I'll freeform it.

SYRIA JOINT RESOLUTION FOR MARKUP JOINT RESOLUTION

To authorize the limited and tailored use of the United States Armed Forces against Syria.

So, we tell Syria to gut it out, we aren't going to do too much, and what we do will be on a small scale and won't go for long. Kind of a Levant drive-by?

Whereas Syria is in material breach of the laws of war by having employed chemical weapons against its civilian population;

At the moment, I think that question is open to debate, but let's not let facts get in the way of our desired theory. Let's just hope for the best. What could go wrong?

Whereas the abuses of the regime of Bashar al-Assad have included the brutal repression and war upon its own civilian population, resulting in more than 100,000 people killed in the past two years, and more than 2 million internally displaced people and Syrian refugees in Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq, creating an unprecedented regional crisis and instability;

Wow. Take out those countries no one wants to raise their children in and well ... you describe pretty much what our ... ahem ... civil war was like ... but let's not quibble.

Whereas the Assad regime has the largest chemical weapons programs in the region and has demonstrated its capability and willingness to repeatedly use weapons of mass destruction against its own people, including the August 21, 2013 attack in the suburbs of Damascus in which the Assad regime murdered over 1,000 innocent people, including hundreds of children;

Whereas there is clear and compelling evidence of the direct involvement of Assad regime forces and senior officials in the planning, execution, and after-action attempts to cover-up the August 21 attack, and hide or destroy evidence of such attack;

Again ... isn' the jury still out on that? Wait ... we haven't even empaneled a jury yet. Oh right. As a side note as someone who was in theater and was reading all the intel reports about Iraq in the years after 9/11, this is, in a word, "interesting" to read .... again.

Whereas the Arab League has declared with regards to the August 21 incident to hold the “Syrian regime responsible for this heinous crime”;

Whereas the United Nations Security Council, in Resolution 1540 (2004) affirmed that the proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons constitutes a threat to international peace and security;

... and the Arab League and UN forces ready to join this action are ... where again?

Whereas in the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003, Congress found that Syria’s acquisition of weapons of mass destruction threatens the security of the Middle East and the national security interests of the United States;

Please, please, please, great Neptune's Trident, PLEASE have Kerry, Hagel, and Obama use more of the signature items from Bush The Younger and Rumsfeld. If I can just get Wesley Clark to quote Wolfowitz, my life will be complete.

Whereas the actions and conduct of the Assad regime are in direct contravention of Syria's legal obligations under the United Nations Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and the Geneva Protocol to the Hague Convention on the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, and also violates standards set forth in the Chemical Weapons Convention;

Let us just put "proof" as a Planning Assumption in the Strategic level OPLAN and move along, shall we? We'll let someone else work that Branch plan after the fact - or again referencing Wesley - we'll just wing it and almost start a war with the Russians.

Whereas Syria's use of weapons of mass destruction and its conduct and actions constitute a grave threat to regional stability, world peace, and the national security interests of the United States and its allies and partners;

OK, for "allies" I think we have France and ... ummm ... Qatar? OK, France ... and as partners we have a small collection of Al Qaeda affiliates and a Whitman's Samplers collection of international jihadi. OK.

Whereas the objectives of the United States use of military force in connection with this authorization are to respond to the use, and deter and degrade the potential future use of weapons of mass destruction by the Syrian government;
Whereas the conflict in Syria will only be resolved through a negotiated political settlement, and Congress calls on all parties to the conflict in Syria to participate urgently and constructively in the Geneva process; and

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to use force in order to defend the national security interests of the United States:

Ouch, that hurt my neck. We will respond to something we think might have happened during an internal civil war 1/3 of the globe away - and by bombing in a, what was that phrase, "limited and tailored use," we will have the Alawites negotiate with people who want to slaughter them wholesale? That is in some way connected to the US Constitution's authority to the Commander in Chief? Ummmm, I may need to come in to school early tomorrow to review that as I am not getting it very well. Must be me.

Now, therefore, be it,

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Government of Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons”.

On that use by Syria, can we have "Ref. A" first?

SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION-The President is authorized, subject to subsection
(b), to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in a limited and
tailored manner against legitimate military targets in Syria, only to:
(1) respond to the use of weapons of mass destruction by the Syrian government in the conflict in Syria;
(2) deter Syria’s use of such weapons in order to protect the national security interests of the United States and to protect our allies and partners against the use of such weapons; and
(3) degrade Syria’s capacity to use such weapons in the future.

(1) Do I need to repeat myself? Let's not and say I did.
(2) So, is Syria threatening the USA, France, or maybe Qatar with gas? We'll call that evidence Ref. B; I'll wait for it.
(3) Pretty much everyone agrees that cruise missiles and gravity bombs are a rather stupid way to eliminate chemical weapons ... especially if you can move them around. So ....

(b) REQUIREMENT FOR DETERMINATION THAT USE OF MILITARY FORCE IS NECESSARY- Before exercising the authority granted in subsection (a), the President shall make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that—
(1) the United States has used all appropriate diplomatic and other peaceful means to prevent the deployment and use of weapons of mass destruction by Syria;
(2) the Syrian government has conducted one or more significant chemical weapons attacks;
(3) the use of military force is necessary to respond to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government;

OK. So, we have to go through all of this again?
(1) Before or after the fact? If before, then we did not use "all appropriate," did we? If after, define "appropriate" - and if no other chemical attacks have taken place, can't one argue that we have via whatever has been done diplomatically and peacefully "prevented the deployment and use?" So, if we don't then attack Syria, the Syrians can go forward killing each other with bullets, RPG, tanks, and femur bones of tapirs and we do nothing?
(2) What about an "insignificant" chemical attack? One that is "wafer thin" perhaps? Kind of like "insignificantly" pregnant, isn't it?
(3) Does that mean more hearings, memos, teleprompter speeches; what?

SECTION 5. SYRIA STRATEGY.
Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this resolution, the President shall consult with Congress and submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives an integrated United States Government strategy for achieving a negotiated political settlement to the conflict in Syria, including a comprehensive review of current and planned U.S. diplomatic, political, economic,
and military policy towards Syria, including:

Wait, what? How is a "limited and tailored use" of force going to get the Syrian parties to the negotiation table? That became our job when? Even if you could, if would end up like this. That paragraph is complete nonsense.

(1) the provision of all forms of assistance to the Syrian Supreme Military Council and other Syrian entities opposed to the government of Bashar Al-Assad that have been properly and fully vetted and share common values and interests with the United States;
(2) the provision of all forms of assistance to the Syrian political opposition, including the Syrian Opposition Coalition;
(3) efforts to isolate extremist and terrorist groups in Syria to prevent their influence on the future transitional and permanent Syrian governments;
(4) coordination with allies and partners; and
(5) efforts to limit support from the Government of Iran and others for the Syrian regime.

(1) Good Lord man - that is already known to be impossible.
(2)-(5): Ummm, yea. In line with (1), I'd like to see that too.

SECTION 6. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION AND REPORTING.
(a) Notification and Provision of Information. Upon his determination to use the authority set forth in section 2 of this Act, the President shall notify Congress, including the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee, of the use of such authority and shall keep Congress fully and currently informed of the use of such authority.
(b) Reports. No fewer than 10 days after the initiation of military operations under the authority provided by Section 2, and every 20 days thereafter until the completion of military operations, the President shall submit to the Congress, including the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a report on the status of such operations, including progress achieved toward the objectives specified in Section 2(a), the financial costs of operations to date, and an assessment of the impact of the operations on the Syrian regime's chemical weapons capabilities and intentions.

SECTION 7. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. The authority set forth in Section 2 of this resolution shall not constitute an authorization for the use of force or a declaration of war except to the extent that it authorizes military action under the conditions, for the specific purposes, and for the limited period of time set forth in this resolution.

Bla, bla, bla, figleaf.

Well, there you have it. Obama, Kerry, and Hagel - congratulations, you have now become Bush, Powell, and Rumsfeld. Governing in this world is a lot more difficult than campaigning to pontificating, isn't it? 

I very sincerely hope that you have a firm grasp on where you are taking this nation. Once the first MK-41 erupts in flames and people are reviewing their Primary, Back-up, and Ready Spare, you will have my full support to fight this right - but really - think hard.

War is a dark room - you and we have no idea what things will be like when we step through that door, and the door shuts behind us.

As a final note, Kerry is wrong and Hagel is right - this is war. When you attack another nation; break their things and kill their people - it is war. We would consider it so, as will they.

Kerry Clear

Good googly moogly what a dog's breakfast we saw this afternoon.

If you missed it, well, here - bask in a brace of buffoonery.

---

UPDATE: I forgot this jewel.

Note to pretty much everyone - I think General Dempsey forgot his place here ... as it his place professionally in this Republic.

So, how is that Calendar-Based Plan going?

I repeat - it didn't have to end this way, but with that one speech at West Point in DEC '09 when the President told the enemy that, "We quit." - all of this was and is predictable.

The NATO commander in Afghanistan has warned that the current casualty rates suffered by the Afghan army and police force are “unsustainable” in an interview published in Tuesday’s Guardian.

US Gen. Joseph Dunford told the paper that Afghan security forces may need five more years of western support before being able to take over full responsibility.

“I view it as serious, and so do all the commanders,” Dunford said of the toll, which has often hit 100 per week.

“I’m not assuming that those casualties are sustainable.”

The general said “time is going to tell” whether NATO had been right to switch in June from playing a combat role to a “train, advise, assist” operation.

“I don’t think you can tell that today,” he added.

You get the foreign policy and defense policy that you vote for. What will happen in Afghanistan over the next few years is not the fault of the military - this mess of Strategic dystopia is the fault of those in civilian uniforms in Washington DC and Brussels, Belgium.

Call what we have broken if you wish - as it is - or some other shambolic mess by those who think themselves wiser than centuries of lessons show - but everyone needs to think about the second and third order effects of what is happening now and how it will manifest itself in the next decade.  That is when the bill will be due.

Wishing for the impossible does not help, however hopeful and well meaning that may be. No, we need cold, hard, and experienced based thinking that is focused on the long term.

A couple of decades ago, good people warned about the second and third order effects of Somalia going south or sideways - and the path from there to 9/11 in hindsight is clear. At the time no one knew where it would lead, but many people warned of the dark path it could lead to.

On the decay of AFG post 2014 and any of the bad options we now find ourselves in Syria, we have only made the future more chaotic. that chaos will have to be addressed - but in history's great schadenfreudic habits - addressed by those who had nothing to do with it to begin with.

Keeping an Eye on the Long Game: Part XLVII

Just a friendly reminder - what is the one thing we seem to be putting so much of our ability to fight and win on? What is the one area that we take for granted will always be there? What is so incredibly fragile, hard to replace, and exceptionally expensive?

When the answer to all of the above is the same, then this should seem quite natural.

China’s military recently launched three small satellites into orbit as part of Beijing’s covert anti-satellite warfare program, according to a U.S. official.

The three satellites, launched July 20 by a Long March-4C launcher, were later detected conducting unusual maneuvers in space indicating the Chinese are preparing to conduct space warfare against satellites, said the official who is familiar with intelligence reports about the satellites.

One of the satellites was equipped with an extension arm capable of attacking orbiting satellites that currently are vulnerable to both kinetic and electronic disruption.

“This is a real concern for U.S. national defense,” the official said. “The three are working in tandem and the one with the arm poses the most concern. This is part of a Chinese ‘Star Wars’ program.”

Everyone loves their nice little C4I diagrams ... and I always enjoyed asking, "What do we do if we can't access that vox and data bandwidth for a few weeks."

Evidently, China has been wargaming that too for quite awhile. 

More fun stuff on the topic from Robert Beckhusen @WIB.

All usual disclaimers about open-source reporting applies, but still. Ponder.

Hat tip HLG.

Ponderable of the Day

I hope everyone is enjoying their end of summer in a proper way. As you may have noticed, I've been in and out of twitter and FB a bit, but have been light here on the homeblog as I bounce between kids, beach, beef, beer, dogs and watermelon - with only the iPhone to keep me company.

I don't like to go too long without visiting the front porch unless I put out the "Cold Iron" sign and set the troll watch. I found just the right thing though, thanks to Paul Yingling.

John Quincy Adams's

Warning Against the Search for "Monsters to Destroy," 1821

And now, friends and countrymen, if the wise and learned philosophers of the elder world, the first observers of nutation and aberration, the discoverers of maddening ether and invisible planets, the inventors of Congreve rockets and Shrapnel shells, should find their hearts disposed to enquire what has America done for the benefit of mankind? Let our answer be this: America, with the same voice which spoke herself into existence as a nation, proclaimed to mankind the inextinguishable rights of human nature, and the only lawful foundations of government. America, in the assembly of nations, since her admission among them, has invariably, though often fruitlessly, held forth to them the hand of honest friendship, of equal freedom, of generous reciprocity. She has uniformly spoken among them, though often to heedless and often to disdainful ears, the language of equal liberty, of equal justice, and of equal rights. She has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own. She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right. Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.... She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit....

[America's] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is,Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.

LCS: Nose Jobs for All My Friends

Remember the silliness of the USS MISS PIGGY (LCS-2) - well, it looks like we have another iteration with USS CORONADO (LCS-4) that is much better.

Surgery scars are still there, but better.

Syria's Battle of the Cloverleafs

If you have not seen the map yet, the below is what the White House put out earlier today describing those areas claimed to be targets of chemical weapons.

The parts that interested me though were those areas held by Assad's forces, those of the opposition, and those which are considered contested. Here is your, "What."

As usual, one of my first thoughts was, "This map is inadequate." So, I went - as I encourage everyone to do as well - to googlemaps. GoogleEarth is better, but run with what you have. This will give us our, "So what?"

There, you have the two maps. See what is going on? 

Yep'r, the opposition is smart - they are trying to get control of the cloverleafs on the Damascus version of a beltway.

Control them and the only access to Damascus is from the NW through Highway 1 through the Yafour intersection East to Qudssaya and then in to the city. You also efficiently cut off the airport to the SE.

With limited resources, you can have trouble holding a road - but if you can take, reinforce and hold intersections - then for resupply purposes, the roads are useless.

Sure, we don't have walled cities anymore - but the fundamentals of blockade and siege have held steady for thousands of years.

Now for the "what's next?"

That is up to the players involved. If access to and from Damascus is cut from 3/4 of the cardinal headings of the compass - then it is easier to concentrate on the other 1/4.

Get that - and the city is officially under siege. Modern people and modern cities do not do well under siege. Knowing that - how hard will this fight get? Yea, that hard.

Here is an interesting thing for you to do in your city; what are those Critical Vulnerabilities of your city? What would you need to take and hold? What does an attacker need to take, what can he destroy - and same for a defender.

Do that a bit more and you will get some idea what the Syrians on both sides are up to.

Folks in LA and Atlanta ... good luck with that.