Pentagon to John Kerry: Shut Up about Syrian Airstrikes, You Don't Know What You're Talking About!

Morning Jolt . . . with Jim Geraghty June 19, 2013 Barring some breaking news, I'm scheduled to appear on CNN's The Lead with Jake Tapper toward the latter half of the 4 p.m. hour today. Pentagon to John Kerry: Shut Up about Syrian Airstrikes, You Don't Know What You're Talking About! Yikes. At a principals meeting in the White House situation room, Secretary of State John Kerry began arguing, vociferously, for immediate U.S. airstrikes against airfields under the control of Bashar al-Assad's Syrian regime -- specifically, those fields it has used to launch chemical weapons raids against rebel forces. It was at this point that the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the usually mild-mannered Army General Martin Dempsey, spoke up, loudly. According to several sources, Dempsey threw a series of brushback pitches at Kerry, demanding to know just exactly what the post-strike plan would be and pointing out that the State Department didn't fully grasp the complexity of such an operation. How about that "Team of Rivals," huh? Melissa Clouthier asked on Twitter if anyone believes that the U.S. should intervene in Syria. To elaborate a bit on my 140-character answers, I would support intervention if it could accomplish two goals, and I'd like to see our government doing more to achieve those two goals. First, considering the death toll (93,000) and scale of the refugee crisis (1.65 million refugees crossing borders, and 4.25 million internally displaced people), I think the United States ought to do what we can to shield civilians fleeing the fighting — including the creation of a refugee/civilian-protection zone near the border, enforced by a coalition of forces to keep combatants out. The Jordanians are rumored to be ready to declare a new safe haven inside southern Syria — except they envision "internationally supported Syrian rebel units could attack Damascus and Syrian refugees could live in relative peace until fighting has ended." Secondly, I think it is in the United States' interest to make sure Assad and his regime suffer some consequence for using chemical weapons; if there isn't a serious consequence, it becomes more likely other regimes and forces will use them in the future. I'm pretty open-minded on the form of that consequence — covert action, overt action, asset seizure, cyber-warfare — but I think there has to be a consequence. For those wondering, the evidence of the Assad regime using sarin is pretty tough to fake: "It would be very, very difficult for the opposition to fake this. Not only would they need the wherewithal to steal it or brew it up themselves. Then they'd need volunteers who would notionally agree to a possibly lethal exposure," the source adds. Meanwhile, Back in Benghazi . . . Remember my story about the smuggling of shoulder-mounted anti-aircraft missiles in and out of Libya during that country's civil war? Public reports indicate that tracking those missiles was almost certainly what Ambassador Chris Stevens was working on when he was attacked and murdered in Benghazi. While the most lurid allegations of U.S. arms smuggling in Libya remain unproven, the Obama administration did give its blessing to Qatar's smuggling of arms to the Libyan rebels in 2011 — and later realized that the weapons were ending up in the hands of Islamist militants. The quiet approval of the arms smuggling violated a United Nations arms embargo and probably ended up exacerbating a problem that would eventually require Stevens to be in that city when the danger was so considerable.  There is a new Reuters report from Benghazi that further corroborates the account of Libyans smuggling their leftover weapons, including missiles, through Benghazi to Syria, and adds additional details: Abdul Basit Haroun says he is behind some of the biggest shipments of weapons from Libya to Syria, which he delivers on chartered flights to neighbouring countries and then smuggles over the border. . . . The first consignment of weapons was smuggled into Syria aboard a Libyan ship delivering aid last year, Haroun says, but now containers of arms are flown "above board" into neighbouring countries on chartered flights. That Libyan ship departed shortly before the attack against Americans in Benghazi: On September 14, 2012, three days after Stevens was killed, Sheera Frenkel, a correspondent for the Times of London, reported from Antakya, Turkey: A Libyan ship carrying the largest consignment of weapons for Syria since the uprising began has docked in Turkey and most of its cargo is making its way to rebels on the front lines, The Times has learnt. Among more than 400 tonnes of cargo the vessel was carrying were SAM-7 surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), which Syrian sources said could be a game-changer for the rebels. Frenkel's report identified the ship's captain as "Omar Mousaeeb, a Libyan from Benghazi and the head of an organisation called the Libyan National Council for Relief and Support, which is supporting the Syrian uprising." The Reuters report continues: A Reuters reporter was taken to an undisclosed location in Benghazi to see a container of weapons being prepared for delivery to Syria. It was stacked with boxes of ammunition, rocket launchers and various types of light and medium weapons.,, The UN report appears to confirm at least some of Haroun's account, in its investigation in the case of a second vessel, the Al Entisar. The [UN] Panel investigated a news report that a Libyan ship with around 400 tonnes of aid had supplied Syrian rebels with "the largest consignment of weapons … since the uprising". The Panel found that the loading port was Benghazi, that the exporter was "a relief organization based in Benghazi" and the consignee was the same Islamic foundation based in Turkey that Haroun said had helped with documentation. Great omen for our efforts to arm the Syrians, huh? Feed the Politicians, Hungry for Another Photo Op to Show Everyone How Compassionate They Are Courtesy of Naked D.C., nothing screams compassion like watching New York City comptroller John Liu, who makes $185,000 per year, demonstrating his solidarity with the poor by eating a cold can of soup . . . while wearing a suit . . . in his car (Naked D.C. wonders if he knows he's allowed to heat the soup). I could be wrong, but that looks like the back seat of a city-issued sport utility vehicle. This is the city comptroller who has a six-person security detail. As I wrote earlier this year: [Washington D.C.]'s congressional delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Newark Mayor Cory Booker and Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper have also done the same, garnering quite a bit of press attention in the process. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the program served over 46 million people in an average month last year, with that amounting to 75 percent of those eligible and 65 percent of those classified "working poor." The average monthly payment is $133.48. You can find the income eligibility tables here; for a family of four it's about $29,976, a level I think that a broad consensus would agree is indeed low-income (presuming recipients are accurately reporting all of their income). (Before you gasp, "and that's before taxes!" note that about 62 percent of those making $30,000 or less pay no income tax.) Of course, it's extremely difficult to feed yourself, much less a family, on $25 for five days. But the title of the program itself makes clear that it's not meant to be the sole source of your ability to afford food; it is specifically labeled supplemental. As CNN reporter Christine Romans noted, "The government designs it so this is on top of what little money you might have, food pantries, soup kitchens. Some people are getting meals quite frankly in schools and the like, like kids are getting, you know, two meals a day in schools." When asked about this, Booker complained that the media spends too much time discussing "the pregnancy of a princess" and not enough time discussing poverty. Fine, but let's be clear that these politicians aren't really "simulate the everyday fact of life" for SNAP recipients, they're simulating a slightly worse situation. Two dozen House Democrats are on their look-at-me-I'm-so-noble diet, and Kristina Ribali examines some of their statements: I was struck by the ignorance of the statements from some members participating in the challenge. Rep. Ted Deutch from Florida said,  "Standing in line at the grocery store, it's relatively few items in my cart, and calculating how much I think they'll cost only to learn that I was off by a little bit, which necessitated putting back a couple of items and leaving with even less — it's just really difficult to do once, I can only imagine how excruciatingly difficult it must be to that every single week."  What?  You had to calculate how much you had before you spent it and you may not get everything you want? This is news? Isn't this what the majority of Americans do when they're buying groceries?  They figure out how much they have to spend and then they live within that budget.  I would love to stock my cart with lobster, ice cream and choice bacon, but I can't afford it, so I don't. Is this congressman so out of touch with reality that he doesn't realize that families, unlike the government don't spend money first and figure a way to pay for it later?  Probably.  Don't even get me started on Rep. Donald Payne who spent $1.08 for a single hard boiled egg.  Yes, one egg.  At the grocery store in my town you can buy an entire dozen eggs for $1.13, and for one person that's a lot of meals.  But maybe it was a really good hard-boiled egg. The SNAP acronym is short for Show-off and Newspeak Anecdotes for Politicians, right? ADDENDUM: Today President Obama speaks at Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, Germany, site of President Reagan's famous, presidency-defining "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" moment. What's today's message? "Mr. Putin, hit the reset button again"? NRO Digest — June 19, 2013 Today on National Review Online . . . JAMES C. CAPRETTA: It's an open-and-shut case. Yes, Premiums Will Go Up. JEFFREY H. ANDERSON: Sweden's small, homogenous population means it isn't a test case for health-care reform. Obamacare in Sweden. ANDREW STILES: The GOP is divided, but Schumer thinks he can get 70 votes. Getting to Yes on the Gang of Eight. PETE SPILIAKOS: In the immigration debate, Republicans should champion the interests of the working class. A Populist Republican Immigration Agenda. CHARLES C. W. COOKE: Americans need to know about and debate a lot more than just amnesty and border security. The Great Immigration Non-Debate. JONAH GOLDBERG: The NSA leaker could be a spy for China, but he's more likely a stooge for cosmopolitanism. A Fool, Not a Spy. KATRINA TRINKO: With the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, one congressman is launching his latest salvo against abortion. Trent Franks, Pro-Life Warrior. To read more, visit www.nationalreview.com Save 75%... Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the newsstand price. Click here for the print edition or here for the digital. National Review also makes a great gift! Click here to send a full-year of NR Digital or here to send the print edition to family, friends, and fellow conservatives. Conservatives — stay healthy! Get plenty of Vitamin Sea on the next National Review cruise. Visit www.NRCruise.com for complete information. Follow Tweet Listen Send National Review, Inc. Manage your National Review subscriptions. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy. This email was sent by: National Review, Inc. 215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor New York, NY 10016