No, seriously, that’s what they’re saying now. Which, you know, in the absence of actual facts, is pretty much all they have. But shut up, racists!
The White House asserted Sunday that a “common-sense test” dictates the Syrian government is responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response. But Obama’s top aide says the administration lacks “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence” that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking.
“This is not a court of law. And intelligence does not work that way,” White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said during his five-network public relations blitz Sunday to build support for limited strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad.
OK, alright, we’ll be charitable here: You don’t always have all the facts you would like to have and yes, sometimes you do have to operate on a “common sense test”. If action is absolutely, positively, vitally important right now as opposed to “whenever the fuck we have the data needed to actually know what happened.”
His Imperial Majesty fails to see such an urgency in this particular case, but that’s another discussion.
So what does “common sense” tell us here, if we absolutely must apply it in lieu of actual evidence?
Assad, wind at his back, with Russia on his side against the weakening Al Qaeda rebels, decides to go ahead and do the one thing he’s been warned would give the U.S. an excuse to enter the war on the side of his Al Qaeda enemies. Is that “common sense?” Sure, bigger blunders have been made in military history, but they’ve rarely been called “common sense” in the history books written after the dust had settled. And by “rarely” we mean “never.”
The Al Qaeda terrorists, on the other hand, the ones that John McShitstain, Lindsay “Sexy Eyes” Grahamnesty and King Ogabe desperately want us to fly CAS for, have every motivation in the book for faking a gas attack to drag the U.S. into the war that they’re losing. Badly. And anybody itching to say “but they’d never do that to their own people”, please cease and desist. Our sides hurt already just thinking about anybody being that ignorant. So yes, they’d definitely benefit.
Oh, and just because we can’t resist it: Russia? Would a former KGB Colonel engineer an outrage that would hugely embarrass the U.S. and further marginalize her as a global power? You bet. Not saying that Vladimir is behind this one, he really doesn’t need to considering the numbskulls currently mismanaging DC with their ineptitude and there’s always the risk that it would be found out, but it’s certainly more likely than Assad deciding to make a war he’s winning much more difficult to win.
And then there’s the whole “gas” issue. Now, being a humble Emperor, we freely admit that military doctrine might have changed considerably since the days we were fighting the Gauls for Julius Caesar or thereabouts, but we do recall that gas was a weapon designed for harassment, interdiction and suppression, not front line use. The reasons for that should be obvious to anybody but the most retarded. And anybody who ever read a page about the belligerent powers’ experience with it in WWI.
Its movements after its been released are somewhat, erratic, although wind direction has a lot to say. Also, there’s the residual toxicity after the fact and a number of other factors making it highly undesirable to release it anywhere near your own positions. Which is pretty much everywhere in a civil war. Can it be used in that fashion? Sure, but it’s a desperate call akin to calling in artillery on your own position because you’re about to be overrun. Akin, not the same, but not something you want to do unless you have to.
Yet “common sense” says that Assad did it anyway?
McDonough conceded the United States doesn’t have concrete evidence Assad was behind the chemical attacks.
And that’s the whole rub right there, isn’t it? Ogabe and his fuckfaced SoS insist that we go fly air support for the animals who murdered 3,000 of our countrymen 12 years ago, almost to the day, based on no concrete evidence by their own admission. Really? Yes, really. Except for that “common sense doctrine” that obviously means “whatever the president says, provided he’s a Democrat Socialist.”
We’ll let McDonut try once again:
McDonough, an Obama foreign policy adviser dating back to his 2008 presidential campaign, said the dots connect themselves.
The material was delivered by “rockets which we know the Assad regime has and we have no indication that the opposition has.”
And, of course, you would have conclusive evidence as to the delivery system, right? No? Oh, and “no indication that the opposition has it” is not the same as “the opposition doesn’t have it.” It’s the same as “we don’t know if they have it.” Which is hardly the sort of evidence needed to potentially set the entire Middle East on fire once the dominoes start falling.
At least not in our mind.