US Assessment of the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons.Looks like this is the core document justifying American action. The core of the summary;
A preliminary U.S. government assessment determined that 1,429 people were killed in the chemical weapons attack, including at least 426 children, though this assessment will certainly evolve as we obtain more information. We assess with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack against opposition elements in the Damascus suburbs on August 21. We assess that the scenario in which the opposition executed the attack on August 21 is highly unlikely. The body of information used to make this assessment includes intelligence pertaining to the regime’s preparations for this attack and its means of delivery, multiple streams of intelligence about the attack itself and its effect, our post-attack observations, and the differences between the capabilities of the regime and the opposition. Our high confidence assessment is the strongest position that the U.S. Intelligence Community can take short of confirmation. We will continue to seek additional information to close gaps in our understanding of what took place.
One thing about this document; it simply summarises the current state of American intelligence. This is normal, even particularly transparent compared to normal practice. You don't give away anything more than you need to where intelligence gathering is concerned. However, given the current climate where leaks and declassified documents are the norm, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't cries for the US to reveal the intelligence documents themselves. Such releases wouldn't prove much - if you don't trust US intelligence to tell the truth about what they know you probably don't trust them not to falsify the intelligence sources themselves - but I'm expecting such calls from the usual sources.
As far as the UK vote goes, the fact that it ruled out any military action at all strikes me as overkill. While blocking immediate military action makes sense, the vote that passed said that no matter how compelling the evidence becomes - how strong the humanitarian concern - the UK won't be involving itself in the response. While I do think the current vote represents the views of the British people, I'm not sure they will represent it in a few weeks/months time.
The actual resolution - calling for a "strong humanitarian response" and leaving open military action while requiring a further Parliamentary vote to sanction such action - seems pretty damned sensible to me. Hell, I'd argue that particular resolution is conservative when it comes to military action, essentially only authorising any military action endorsed by the UN SC (something that won't happen).
Author
Topic: Egypt and the world and Libya - Now without Ukraine! (Read 364315 times)