I still haven't heard the legal basis or the actual objectives of a Syrian strike

[morningfog]

I have yet to hear anyone articulate the legal justifications for striking Syria. Under what international framework would it be legal? I am not talking about under US law.

I have also yet to hear the actual objectives. What is the end goal in this military adventure? How is it determined when it is reached?

No one in the Administration has said the goal is regime change. None have said the goal is ending the civil war or even tipping the balance. The objective, as presented, is an ill-defined, amorphous, open-ended goal, to degrade and deter the use of weapons of mass destruction. One missile hitting one plane could qualify as degrading the ability. But, a months long bombing campaign may not deter future use. We know that the weapons cannot be destroyed or secured without ground troops.

I'd like to hear what the actual objectives are and how bombings would serve that end.

[jsr]

1. What? Our President was a law professor!

That's good enough for me.

[scarletwoman]

3. "No one in the Administration has said the goal is regime change." No, they haven't *said* so,

but it is.

[bluestate10]

4. Syria is in violation of International Law. It is an outlaw state.

http://www.icrc.org/eng/war-and-law/weapons/chemical-biological-weapons/overview-chemical-biological-weapons.htm

[truedelphi]

5. FWIW and FYI:

99th Monkey was on Du earlier today explaining this:

And for the sake of information:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023619119

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

8. + 1,000,000,000!

[delrem]

9. The US Iraq war was a violation of International Law. A war crime. The US is an outlaw state.

[eridani]

13. So what? So is the United States n/t

[morningfog]

14. But where is the legal basis for war in there?

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. Cuz they're operating outside the "norms"! I heard it a hundred times last week! Duh!

Even Nancy Pelosi said they're outside the "circle of something or other"...

Not to mention her five year old grandson thinks it's... it's... it's... it's about the children!

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

7. Nobody should be allowed to kill children.

Not by artillery or air strike.

Not by chemical agents.

Not by drones.

[bhikkhu]

10. That should come Tuesday.

I'm guessing he'll spell it out pretty clearly, but what you said sounds most likely - a punitive strike to degrade Assad's ability to use chemical weapons.

[The Straight Story]

11. As far as objectives

It would be dumb for them to blurt out anything that would give away plans ahead of time, other than in a generic sense like 'reduce their ability to use chemical weapons'.

The goal does not need to be more publicly more clear than that, either folks are for that idea or they are not.

[frylock]

12. it's the underpants gnome's strategery..

1) bomb Syria
2) ?????
3) profit! (or peace or something)

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. the New Yorker had an excellent article just last week answering this question

August 29, 2013

Obama Promises Syria Strike Will Have No Objective

Posted by Andy Borowitz



WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Attempting to quell criticism of his proposal for a limited military mission in Syria, President Obama floated a more modest strategy today, saying that any U.S. action in Syria would have “no objective whatsoever.”

“Let me be clear,” he said in an interview on CNN. “Our goal will not be to effect régime change, or alter the balance of power in Syria, or bring the civil war there to an end. We will simply do something random there for one or two days and then leave.”


“I want to reassure our allies and the people of Syria that what we are about to undertake, if we undertake it at all, will have no purpose or goal,” he said. “This is consistent with U.S. foreign policy of the past.”

While Mr. Obama clearly hoped that his proposal of a brief and pointless intervention in Syria would reassure the international community, it immediately drew howls of protest from U.S. allies, who argued that two days was too open-ended a timeframe for such a mission.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/08/obama-promises-syria-strike-will-have-no-objective.html

[Carolina]

16. And do

not expect any legal justification or solid objective(s)... it's more neocon bullshit