Global Growth Relations
356 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU from War Against Islam
Scoop.it!

Full Text of Obama CYA Speech: 'Our Leadership is at Stake'

Full Text of Obama CYA Speech: 'Our Leadership is at Stake' | Global Growth Relations | Scoop.it
"Our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria," president tells nation.

 

This is the full text of US President Barack Obama's speech on Syria, as provided by the Federal News Service:

My fellow Americans, tonight I want to talk to you about Syria, why it matters and where we go from here. Over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war. Over a hundred thousand people have been killed. Millions have fled the country. In that time, America has worked with allies to provide humanitarian support, to help the moderate opposition and to shape a political settlement.

But I have resisted calls for military action because we cannot resolve someone else's civil war through force, particularly after a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The situation profoundly changed, though, on Aug. 21st, when Assad's government gassed to death over a thousand people, including hundreds of children. The images from this massacre are sickening, men, women, children lying in rows, killed by poison gas, others foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath, a father clutching his dead children, imploring them to get up and walk. On that terrible night, the world saw in gruesome detail the terrible nature of chemical weapons and why the overwhelming majority of humanity has declared them off limits, a crime against humanity and a violation of the laws of war.

Historical background

This was not always the case. In World War I, American GIs were among the many thousands killed by deadly gas in the trenches of Europe. In World War II, the Nazis used gas to inflict the horror of the Holocaust. Because these weapons can kill on a mass scale, with no distinction between soldier and infant, the civilized world has spent a century working to ban them. And in 1997, the United States Senate overwhelmingly approved an international agreement prohibiting the use of chemical weapons, now joined by 189 governments that represent 98 percent of humanity.

On Aug. 21st, these basic rules were violated, along with our sense of common humanity.

No one disputes that chemical weapons were used in Syria. The world saw thousands of videos, cellphone pictures and social media accounts from the attack. And humanitarian organizations told stories of hospitals packed with people who had symptoms of poison gas.

Moreover, we know the Assad regime was responsible. In the days leading up to Aug. 21st, we know that Assad's chemical weapons personnel prepared for an attack near an area they where they mix sarin gas. They distributed gas masks to their troops. Then they fired rockets from a regime-controlled area into 11 neighborhoods that the regime has been trying to wipe clear of opposition forces.

Shortly after those rockets landed, the gas spread, and hospitals filled with the dying and the wounded. We know senior figures in Assad's military machine reviewed the results of the attack. And the regime increased their shelling of the same neighborhoods in the days that followed. We've also studied samples of blood and hair from people at the site that tested positive for sarin.

When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory. But these things happened. The facts cannot be denied.

The question now is what the United States of America and the international community is prepared to do about it, because what happened to those people, to those children, is not only a violation of international law, it's also a danger to our security.

Consequences of inaction

Let me explain why. If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons.

As the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas and using them. Over time our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield, and it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and to use them to attack civilians.

If fighting spills beyond Syria's borders, these weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan and Israel.

And a failure to stand against the use of chemical weapons would weaken prohibitions against other weapons of mass destruction and embolden Assad's ally, Iran, which must decide whether to ignore international law by building a nuclear weapon or to take a more peaceful path.

This is not a world we should accept. This is what's at stake. And that is why, after careful deliberation, I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to respond to the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike. The purpose of this strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime's ability to use them and to make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use. That's my judgment as commander in chief.

But I'm also the president of the world's oldest constitutional democracy. So even though I possessed the authority to order military strikes, I believed it was right, in the absence of a direct or imminent threat to our security, to take this debate to Congress. I believe our democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of Congress, and I believe that America acts more effectively abroad when we stand together.

This is especially true after a decade that put more and more war-making power in the hands of the president, and more and more burdens on the shoulders of our troops, while sidelining the people's representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force.

A slippery slope?

Now, I know that after the terrible toll of Iraq and Afghanistan, the idea of any military action, no matter how limited, is not going to be popular. After all, I've spent four and a half years working to end wars, not to start them. Our troops are out of Iraq, our troops are coming home from Afghanistan, and I know Americans want all of us in Washington, especially me, to concentrate on the task of building our nation here at home, putting people back to work, educating our kids, growing our middle class. It's no wonder, then, that you're asking hard questions. So let me answer some of the most important questions that I've heard from members of Congress and that I've read in letters that you've sent to me.

First, many of you have asked: Won't this put us on a slippery slope to another war? One man wrote to me that we are still recovering from our involvement in Iraq. A veteran put it more bluntly: This nation is sick and tired of war.

My answer is simple. I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan. I will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like Libya or Kosovo. This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective: deterring the use of chemical weapons and degrading Assad's capabilities.

Others have asked whether it's worth acting if we don't take out Assad. As some members of Congress have said, there's no point in simply doing a pinprick strike in Syria.

Let me make something clear: The United States military doesn't do pinpricks.

Even a limited strike will send a message to Assad that no other nation can deliver. I don't think we should remove another dictator with force. We learned from Iraq that doing so makes us responsible for all that comes next. But a targeted strike can make Assad or any other dictator think twice before using chemical weapons.

Israel can defend itself

Other questions involve the dangers of retaliation. We don't dismiss any threats, but the Assad regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military. Any other — any other retaliation they might seek is in line with threats that we face every day. Neither Assad nor his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his demise. And our ally Israel can defend itself with overwhelming force, as well as the unshakable support of the United States of America.

Many of you have asked a broader question: Why should we get involved at all in a place that's so complicated and where, as one person wrote to me, those who come after Assad may be enemies of human rights? It's true that some of Assad's opponents are extremists. But al-Qaida will only draw strength in a more chaotic Syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians from being gassed to death. The majority of the Syrian people and the Syrian opposition we work with just want to live in peace, with dignity and freedom. And the day after any military action, we would redouble our efforts to achieve a political solution that strengthens those who reject the forces of tyranny and extremism.

Finally, many of you have asked, why not leave this to other countries or seek solutions short of force?

And several people wrote to me, we should not be the world's policeman. I agree. And I have a deeply held preference for peaceful solutions. Over the last two years my administration has tried diplomacy and sanctions, warnings and negotiations. But chemical weapons were still used by the Assad regime.

Encouraging signs

However, over the last few days we've seen some encouraging signs in part because of the credible threat of U.S. military action as well as constructive talks that I had with President Putin. The Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons. The Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons and even said they'd join the chemical weapons convention, which prohibits their use.

It's too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad's strongest allies.

I have therefore asked the leaders of Congress to postpone a vote to authorize the use of force while we pursue this diplomatic path. I'm sending Secretary of State John Kerry to meet his Russian counterpart on Thursday, and I will continue my own discussions with President Putin. I've spoken to the leaders of two of our closest allies, France and the United Kingdom. And we will work together in consultation with Russia and China to put forward a resolution at the U.N. Security Council requiring Assad to give up his chemical weapons and to ultimately destroy them under international control.

We'll also give U.N. inspectors the opportunity to report their findings about what happened on Aug. 21st. And we will continue to rally support from allies, from Europe to the Americas, from Asia to the Middle East who agree on the need for action.

Meanwhile, I've ordered our military to maintain their current posture, to keep the pressure on Assad and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails. And tonight I give thanks again to our military and their families for their incredible strength and sacrifices.

The burden of leadership

My fellow Americans, for nearly seven decades the United States has been the anchor of global security. This has meant doing more than forging international agreements. It has meant enforcing them. The burdens of leadership are often heavy, but the world's a better place because we have borne them.

And so to my friends on the right, I ask you to reconcile your commitment to America's military might with a failure to act when a cause is so plainly just.

To my friends on the left, I ask you to reconcile your belief in freedom and dignity for all people with those images of children writhing in pain and going still on a cold hospital floor, for sometimes resolutions and statements of condemnation are simply not enough.

Indeed, I'd ask every member of Congress, and those of you watching at home tonight, to view those videos of the attack, and then ask: What kind of world will we live in if the United States of America sees a dictator brazenly violate international law with poison gas and we choose to look the other way? Franklin Roosevelt once said our national determination to keep free of foreign wars and foreign entanglements cannot prevent us from feeling deep concern when ideals and principles that we have cherished are challenged.

Our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria, along with our leadership of a world where we seek to ensure that the worst weapons will never be used. America is not the world's policeman. Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong. But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act. That's what makes America different. That's what makes us exceptional.

With humility, but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth.

Thank you. God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.


Via littlebytesnews
IOANNIS APOSTOLOU's insight:

God save America... Or?

more...
littlebytesnews's curator insight, September 11, 2013 5:05 AM

So the bottom line he's looking to save his butt for drawing the redline....and now wants to take credit for diplomacy, that may or may not fail, but he still wants to threaten Assad and bomb Syria?? 

 

However, as I said before, if I was Assad I'd be skeptical on trusting Obama..after all he had Gaddaffi killed even after he gave up his WMDs and was not a threat to the US but helped AQ take over Libya and assassinate him.

 

12/2003:

"The decision by Libya was last night hailed by both London and Washington as a victory in the so-called war on terror and that the invasion of Iraq had sent a clear message to any other nations seeking to develop WMD.

Libya's willingness to give up its WMD program is essentially another step in the process that was started earlier this summer when it agreed to accept responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing and to pay $10m (£5.6m) in compensation to the relatives of each of the 270 people killed in the 1988 attack on the airliner.

Libya has been making efforts to return to the international fold and develop closer trade links with the West since 1999, when it handed over two Libyan suspects to stand trial under Scottish law at a purpose-built court in the Netherlands. In January 2001, one of those suspects, Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, was convicted. His co-accused was cleared.

In exchange for the compensation and the acceptance of responsibility, the United Nations in September formally lifted sanctions against Libya that had been in place since 1991. America's own sanctions have remained, with Washington insisting they would stay in place until Libya proved it "changed its ways". The UN resolution also demanded that Libya give up any WMD.

"

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1220-08.htm

 

However, ten years later the Obama administration turned on Gaddaffi and helped have him assassinated by Islamic terrroists....and then Benghazi happened....if I were Assad I would be very skeptical of trusting the Obama admin not to have Assad assassinated after he gives up his chemical weapons. 

 

Video:Belgian journalist held prisoner in Syria says rebels used gas |http://sco.lt/5lmkjJ ;

Related:

Obama Open To Diplomacy After Samantha Powers Said Exhausted All Options http://sco.lt/73Jjjl

 

Kerry Rhetorically Speaks,Russia& Syria Like 'Rhetorical' Idea for Averting War   http://sco.lt/7m8xyj ;

 

Assad loyalists "forming human shields" to protect from US strikes  http://sco.lt/6Aeb1F

 

 China, joins Russia, Has Warships “Observing” Close to Syria http://sco.lt/6EQept ;

 

The U.S. has intercepted an order from Iran to militants in Iraq to attack the U.S. Embassy and other American interests in Baghdad in the event of a strike on Syria, http://ht.ly/oCmzK

 

Video: “Allahu Akbar!” @SenJohnMcCain, @statedept allies caught Executing Restrained Kneeling Pro-Assad Civilians http://sco.lt/87DDcH ;

 

Iran Threatens To Unleash Hezbollah, Kidnap Americans If U.S. Strikes Syria  http://sco.lt/6dAmgr ;

 

Video:Terrorists Coming Thru Southern Border;Hezbollah training in Mexico! http://sco.lt/8zAOJ7 ;

and likely in the US already as sleeper cells, thanks to our porous borders that this threat from Iran could become a reality if Obama strikes Syria. 

 

Putin right,Kerry lied:Top intelligence reports   confirm jihadists overpowering 'moderates' | http://sco.lt/7cYWVF ;

 

The Truth About Al Qaeda Infiltration in Syria http://sco.lt/7wmiZN

 

Allen West to Congress: Don't Let Obama Make You a Scapegoat for Syria  http://sco.lt/5QMOmn ;

 

Obama gets Cold Feet -Syrian's celebrating&call admin a joke  http://sco.lt/8ULZuj

 

EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack http://sco.lt/5ugDFR ;

 

Syrians vow to “burn America’s skies” on Obama’s Facebook  http://sco.lt/8JmIMr ;

 

A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.

Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons against its own people.


Read more:  

http://t.co/zloPWbJDIk

 

Related:

Russia warns US of 'catastrophic consequences' of Syria intervention http://sco.lt/8PtJ5d

 

More.....

On Fox News today with Neil Cavuto: Wayne Simmons frmr CIA op claims he has human evidence that the FSA is the secular/humanitarian group&the US shld help&bomb Syria air&palace...however that's contrary to other reports, including reports from victims of the attack.

 

Related:

video evidence shows Syrian rebels using the chemical weapons in Syria  https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=194084144098569&set=vb.1390539321171537&type=2&theater

 

UN Diplomat: Jihadists May Have Used Gas - Not Assadhttp://sco.lt/5YnWCX ;

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official

Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof,” that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

 

Liberal Hypocrisy in Iraq and Syria

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberal-wmd-hypocrisy-in-iraq-and-syria ;

 

President Obama is weighing a military strike against Syria that would be of limited scope and duration, designed to serve as punishment for Syria’s use of chemical weapons and as a deterrent, while keeping the United States out of deeper involvement in that country’s civil war, according to senior administration officials.

The timing of such an attack, which would probably last no more than two days and involve sea-launched cruise missiles — or, possibly, long-range bombers — striking military targets not directly related to Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, would be dependent on three factors: completion of an intelligence report assessing Syrian government culpability in last week’s alleged chemical attack; ongoing consultation with allies and Congress; and determination of a justification under international law.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/kerry-obama-determined-to-hold-syria-accountable-for-using-chemical-weapons/2013/08/26/599450c2-0e70-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html

 

Remember Bashar the Reformer?

American officials who for ego or because of animosity toward George W. Bush did their best to end Assad’s isolation. It’s always fun to read their statements reporting Assad’s willingness to solve mutual problems.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.), who took time out to tour the markets to maximum benefit for Syrian state television.Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), more John Kerry, and even more John Kerry. That second story reminds how the Obama administration once went so far as to give Syria spare parts for its planes.The late Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Penn.), at the time still a Republican, might have acted as a tour guide: His trip with Nelson and Kerry was his 16th taxpayer-funded trip to Damascus, and it was not his last.Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may not have gone herself, but she used her senate colleagues’ experience meeting Assad to justify her description of him as a reformer. “There’s a different leader in Syria now,” she told CBS’s Face the Nation, explaining, “Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer.”Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) spent nearly $8,000 on two trips to Damascus, while Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) spent nearly twice that, according to Legistorm.Gen. David Petraeus repeatedly asked President George W. Bush for permission to go tête-à-tête with Assad in Damascus; let’s be glad Bush said no, both because it saved Petraeus the embarrassment and denied Assad a propaganda coup.

Perhaps in this age of budget-cutting, it would be useful to ask Pelosi, Kerry, and Nelson—all of whom still serve publicly—about what in hindsight they see as the value of their trips to Syria

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/08/26/remember-bashar-the-reformer/

 

 U.S. 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad's regime' | http://sco.lt/5MRT4j

 

http://www.scoop.it/t/war-against-islam?q=Syria

 

http://www.scoop.it/t/war-against-islam?q=hezbollah

 

 

Scooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU
Scoop.it!

Thought Leadership is a Synonym for Attention

I’ve been thinking about thought leadership lately.

Many smart people, including venture capitalist Brad Feld and Marketo cofounder Jon Miller, equate conten
IOANNIS APOSTOLOU's insight:

by placing a label in front of your name, doesn't mean you have achieved it!

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU from Innovative Marketing and Crowdfunding
Scoop.it!

How to Differentiate Great Leaders from Good Leaders

How to Differentiate Great Leaders from Good Leaders | Global Growth Relations | Scoop.it
Recently, I attended a memorial service for Dennis Dammerman, a retired GE executive and one of the very first people I interviewed with at GE 30 years ago. He was a mentor and friend to me and a

Via Marty Koenig
more...
Contact Boostonsvotrestartup's curator insight, August 21, 2013 5:08 PM

Yes, valuable ! 

Mike Doherty's curator insight, August 22, 2013 4:38 AM

Build a WE not a ME organization. You have to inspire people. An idea or initiative may start with that constituency of one, but eventually you need buy-in from a company of many

Winnfin's comment, August 28, 2013 3:12 AM
We believe, to become a great leader you must have 50% Knowledge, 25% Understanding, 20% Belief, 5% Charm. You cant learn everything from a book or a teacher, the best sauce of knowledge is experience, the same way the best way to manage is by sharing those experiences with others so you can all learn from the successes and failures together.
Scooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU
Scoop.it!

civitasblog: Τα αποτελέσματα της έρευνας CIVITAS Leadership ...

civitasblog: Τα αποτελέσματα της έρευνας CIVITAS Leadership ... | Global Growth Relations | Scoop.it
Η CIVITAS στην προσπάθειά της να συμβάλει στην αποκωδικοποίηση των νέων δεδομένων δημοσιεύει τα ευρήματα της έρευνας Leadership που έγινε φέτος για δεύτερη φορά. Η έρευνα πραγματοποιήθηκε διαδικτυακά στο ...
IOANNIS APOSTOLOU's insight:

Είναι μία οπτική συνανθρώπων μας, οι οποίοι χρειάζεται να σηκώσουν τα μανίκια και να αρχίσουν την μάχη για να διεκδικήσουν αυτές τις αλλαγές!

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU
Scoop.it!

The Most Important Negotiation in Your Life

The Most Important Negotiation in Your Life | Global Growth Relations | Scoop.it
It's the one you have with yourself.
IOANNIS APOSTOLOU's insight:

The big four!!!

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU
Scoop.it!

Are you a thought leader?

Are you a thought leader? | Global Growth Relations | Scoop.it
Ask.com says that a thought leader is an individual or firm that is recognized as an authority in a specialized field and whose expertise is sought and often rewarded.
IOANNIS APOSTOLOU's insight:

I just found me!

 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by IOANNIS APOSTOLOU
Scoop.it!

Don’t Write Off the Coaching Leadership Style

Don’t Write Off the Coaching Leadership Style | Global Growth Relations | Scoop.it
Coaching leaders help employees identify their unique strengths and weaknesses and tie them to their personal and career aspirations. They encourage employees to establish long-term development goals
IOANNIS APOSTOLOU's insight:

Learning is the only way to the top!

more...
No comment yet.