• Overheard in the White House: Why We Are Going to War in Syria

    September 4, 2013

    Tags: , , , ,
    Posted in: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq

    Mr. President, we’re going to have to convince the American people about this war with Syria. Our polling shows more support for nuking Miley Cyrus the next time she twerks on TV than for your policy.

    She does have a sweet little–

    We have the Congressional midterms coming up, and Boehner is up my ass about defunding my healthcare legacy. I need this vote, or Hillary’s gonna kill me.

    Right, right, sir.

    (Licking of chops heard)

    Kill them! Kill them all!

    Easy Susan, I promise you’ll see the post-attack color close up photos first, then you pass them to McCain like always.

    Yes, It likes the Precious Photos, It likes them.

    Somebody get her some water or something?

    So what’s our reason for Syria?

    Hey, do we still have to put five bucks in the tip jar if we say ‘Slam Dunk’?

    Seriously now people, we are committing American lives at risk here.

    (General laughter in room)

    OK, OK. We go to war in Iran–


    OK, war in Syria because of a red line.

    Is that the same as a line in the sand?

    No, ours is red. Very different.

    Good one, sir.

    Well, Americans have not been hooked tight enough by the red line. We need another reason.

    OK, evil dictator, killing his own people, yadda yadda.

    That has some traction, but roughly half of the dead in Syria were killed by ‘our own’ rebels, and those were their own people too. What else?

    U.S. credibility?

    (General laughter in room)

    I think U.S. credibility went down the freaking toilet when you promised to close Gitmo and didn’t.

    Shut up Chuck. Nobody asked you.

    Goddammit, I served in Vietnam.

    Yeah, so did John Kerry and Colin Powell, and you don’t see them whining.

    So why don’t we just go old-school and say the Syrians attacked us in the Gulf of Tonkin?

    Would that work?

    Dammit, I had friends killed in Vietnam because of that lie.

    I think one of my frat brothers’ dad got greased in Laos. Is that over there too?

    Also, I read somewhere that we used napalm, white phosphorus and Agent Orange over there. Are those chemical weapons?

    Yeah, but that’s history.

    Not to the victims and their malformed children still alive, nor to the loved ones still mourning their dead at America’s hand.

    O.K., back on track, how about, um, violation of international law?

    (General laughter in room)

    Maybe with our drones, ongoing indefinite imprisonment at Gitmo, torture, renditions, black sites, NSA spying on foreign heads of state, bringing down a sovereign leader’s plane because we thought that son-of-a-bitch Snowden was on board, pushing international law too hard might not be the best thing.

    Easy Chuck.

    Yeah, especially since until around 2006 we were rendering prisoners into Assad’s Syria for out-sourced torture.

    Dammit Chuck!

    OK, back to Iran. We bomb the hell out of Syria to send a message to Iran.

    What message?

    That they can’t support evil regimes.

    But the Iranians have been supporting bad guys in Lebanon forever, these days the Taliban in Afghanistan, and basically control our allies in free Iraq. Hell, they even sent Qods force guys into Iraq to kill our own troops. Not sure here why Syria, now, is the place for a message.

    So what do we have left?

    I’d say we just keep saying ‘WMD, WMD’ over and over again until Americans beg Congress for a military strike on Syria.

    I like that a lot. Any opposition? No? OK then, we go with WMD scare tactics.

    Might as well.

    Agreed. It worked last time.

    O.K., thanks everyone. And thank you gentlemen for coming back to Washington to help see this through. John, would you be kind enough to walk W., Dick and Condi out please?

    Related Articles:

    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

  • Recent Comments

    • Kyzl Orda said...


      From today’s UK Guardian:

      “War Games: John McCain caught playing poker on iPhone during Syria Debate”

      McCain tweeted “…worst of all I lost…”


      09/4/13 12:59 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Coming soon: “We Meant Well- the Syria Edition”

      09/4/13 1:32 PM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...


      Sorry, the Syria edition is currently at the back of the line, following the Afghan Edition, Libya Edition, Yemen/Egypt Combo Edition and…

      The one book I’d like to write, How We Reconstructed America, apparently has no audience.

      09/4/13 5:55 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      “WMW-Syria” AKA “More Lies My President Told Me”

      America, you are so fucked.

      09/4/13 7:00 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      “I didn’t set a red line,” Mr. Obama said during a news conference here in Stockholm. “The world set a red line. My credibility’s not on the line. The international community’s credibility’s on the line. And America and Congress’s credibility’s on the line.”

      Breaking Bad is hard to do.

      It’s not me. It’s you.

      09/4/13 7:14 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      What’s the ENDGAME, Obama?

      Before the US War Party gets US stuck in another quagmire in Syria, the American people should demand their representatives/whores in congress, who are in the pocket of the Military-Industrial-Surveillance Complex, require a clear endgame strategy before giving another presidense a blank check. It should answer these questions:

      1. Is Syria strategic to U.S. vital interests or are we doing the bidding of Saudi and Israeli interests?

      2. Why are 1,400 people killed in the most recent alleged chemical weapons attack more important than 100,000 killed in the Syrian civil war? Why didn’t the United States did not intervene militarily in Congo, where 5 million people and counting have been killed, in Sudan, where the civil war and famine killed 2 million people, and in Rwanda, where the Tutsi tribe killed 800,000 members of the Hutu tribe?

      3. What have we learned from debacles in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya? Where does our “responsibility to protect” doctrine advocated by U.N. ambassador Samantha Power and others is against international law for a reason stop? Why does it always have to be the United States that assumes the responsibility?

      4,. Why are chemical weapons the red line? Chemical weapons have killed far fewer people over human history than conventional bullets and bombs – in the Syrian civil war, it’s about 1 percent of the more than 100,000 people killed thus far in the conflict. Chemical weapons hardly have been a “weapon of mass destruction” compared to conventional munitions. Also, in 1988, when Saddam Hussein, then receiving U.S. support in his war with the Iranians, used chemical weapons against his own people, the United States not only didn’t attack him, but looked the other way and lent him another billion dollars six months later.

      Obama says it’s about our credibility with the world. He’s wrong. It’s about our government’s credibility with the American people who have been lied to repeatedly.

      The lying has to stop Or this is the end.

      09/4/13 7:48 PM | Comment Link

    • Michael Murry said...


      The American government has already established its credibility with the rest of the world. The world knows we will do the stupidest and most destructive thing possible. The world hasn’t the slightest doubt about that. We’ve got credibility all right, just not the kind supposed by the amoral cretins who run our government.

      09/5/13 9:41 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      As a proud member of the Amoral Cretins Association, I strongly object to the label you associated with the Usual Suspects such as Hillary Clinton, Kerry etc who voted for the Iraq War and are pushing US into the abyss. Kerry’s statement, paraphrasing our Amoral Cretin idol, George Costanza, “it’s not a lie if you believe it,” “it’s not a war if it only involves a limited action” deserves a special category. Amoral cretin cannot do it justice.

      09/5/13 3:29 PM | Comment Link

    • meloveconsullongtime said...


      When Charles De Gaulle first met the third-rate intellect Kissinger in 1969, De Gaulle’s first words to him were, “Why don’t you get out of Viet Nam, now?” Kissinger, who evidently didn’t bother to consider that the French knew something about Viet Nam, said to withdraw too early would damage America’s credibility. De Gaulle answered to the effect that American credibility had already been ruined in Viet Nam.

      09/5/13 3:31 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Kissinger??? He was an American?

      09/5/13 3:39 PM | Comment Link

    • meloveconsullongtime said...


      Bill Mauldin cartoon from the beginning of America’s involvement in Viet Nam, an American soldier encounters a French one:


      09/5/13 3:44 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Obama joins Clapper and Alexander in the “George Costanza” liars club:

      09/5/13 3:47 PM | Comment Link

    • meloveconsullongtime said...


      Bauer wrote, “Kissinger??? He was an American?”

      I notice you prefer to refer to him in the past tense.

      09/5/13 3:53 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      In the past…as I refer to democracy in America.

      09/5/13 7:10 PM | Comment Link

    • meloveconsullongtime said...


      Nr Bauer wrote, about referring to Kissinger in the past tense: “In the past…as I refer to democracy in America.”

      I disagree about how and why Kissinger was never American. It’s not because he was an enemy of democracy – he did in fact believe in a kind of “democracy” – but rather, it’s because he never loved America AS A COUNTRY!

      America is just an abstraction to Kissinger and his kind. To them, America is an abstraction, not a country.

      Here is just one example of how to regard America as a country (meaning loving it in personal ways) instead of an abstraction – because true patriotism is always personal (AND THEREFORE TRAGIC!), and never abstract:


      09/5/13 9:10 PM | Comment Link

    • WEVA said...


      You forgot the AIPAC lobbyist and Prince Bandar high-fiving in the corner.

      09/6/13 4:01 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Obama Crossing the Red Line to Impeachment ?

      Assuming the House defeats Obama’s Plan to Red Line Syria and the Mad Obomber does ahead with war anyway, he may be crossing the House’s Red Line and could face impeachment… or so Joe Biden believes:

      Say it ain’t so, Joe:

      “So I brought a group of constitutional scholars together to write a piece that I’m going to deliver to the whole United States Senate pointing out thatthe president has no constitutional authority to take this country to war against a country of 70 million people unless we’re attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to be attacked. And if he does, I would move to impeach him. The House obviously has to do that, but I would lead an effort to impeach him.”

      And if the House impeaches Obomber, Hillary Clinton’s chances in 2016 will be among the collateral damage.

      If He Quacks Like a DUCK: Where’s Lord Humungous, Chris Christie, stand on war with Syria? Good question. Christie was asked for his opinion on U.S. policy in Syria, but he ducked the issue. The governor won’t take a stand on the immigration-reform effort underway in Congress, either. Sure, these are federal issues, but Christie tackles Washington stories all the time — just think about how many times he’s condemned “Obamacare.” So why dodge questions about major issues on the public’s mind?

      “The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.” – MLK

      But that is where CC is most comfortable.

      09/6/13 6:58 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      This is gonna piss the neo-cons:

      The Syrian government has accepted a Russian proposal to put its chemical weapons under international control to avoid a possible U.S. military strike, Interfax news agency quoted Syria’s foreign minister as saying on Tuesday.

      “We held a very fruitful round of talks with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov yesterday, and he proposed an initiative relating to chemical weapons. And in the evening we agreed to the Russian initiative,” Interfax quoted the minister, Walid al-Moualem, as telling the speaker of Russia’s lower house parliament house in Moscow.

      He said Syria had agreed because this would “remove the grounds for American aggression,” the report said.

      If only Iraq had agreed to US demands. Oh wait, they did.


      09/10/13 12:06 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)