Patriots Cut Tebow; Eagles Next Stop?

Former Heisman trophy winning quarterback Tim Tebow was cut today by the New England Patriots. That creates the prospect that the Philadelphia Eagles may sign the tough running QB to share running around or over defender duties with Michael Vick.

Looking for his fourth NFL team Tebow may find a good fit in an offense that plans to rely on injury prone running quarterback Michael Vick on every play. The task of being a running quarterback in a passing league is harder than ever before with large high speed, defenders. With two tough running quarterbacks it might work for a year or three.

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ap-source-tim-tebow-cut-patriots-20126567

U.S. Vigilante Justice or War Crimes Tribunal for Syria Chemical Attack?

President Barrack Hussein Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have made it clear that the U.S. will not let Syria go unpunished for the chemical attack on a Damascus suburb that Sect. Kerry says killed more than 1400 souls. The U.S. Government seems set upon a course of cruise missile attacks of what some would regard as vigilante justice outside of the context of International War Crimes courts. Evidently the administration logic goes that Courts of Criminal Law are no justice at all and only vigilante justice by the strong can be swift and certain.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23906913

Most AMericans oppose military intervention in SYria. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/30/us-syria-crisis-usa-poll-idUSBRE97T0UO20130830 yet President Obama sems determined to pursue limited military vengenance in order that Syrian leader Assad 'can't get away with it'. One infers that the attorney-President regards judgement by an Internal War Crimes court as no justice at all so Assad would get away with it without a cruise missile attack upon his interests.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/30/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE97K0EL20130830  Obama-Syria can't get away with it

While President Obama has just ordered the U..S. Government to no longer prosecute recreational use of ganja across the 50 states and has supported homosexual marriage recognition in federal law he has little confidence in international war crimes courts evidently. Perhaps he should seek to reinforce that institution, except of course U.S. Presidents seem to prefer to be outside the law themselves or at least not subject to its judgement on possible war crimes for-themselves.

Secret. of State Kerry said in effect that the 'who we are' point does not allow American leaders to tolerate war crimes on the innocent such that we cannot help but intervene. Starting with F.D.R. doing little to help the Jews in Germany during the Second World War through using agent orange in Vietnam and with plenty of civilian casualties from a number of causes through to modern times with hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan as the U.S. government pursued dubious policy goals and while the U.S. sat on its hands in the genocides of Cambodia, Rwanda and Darfur the ability of U.S. administrations to turn a blind eye to genocide and democide when convenient-as when 50,000 Iraqi civilians were dying annually during the Clinton era sanctions is demonstrably untroublesome. What is different about the 1400 deaths in Syria that is evident is the vast financial value of regime change with the hostile takeover value immediate.

In pursuing vigilante justice as a partisan power-for the U.S. has egged on the rebels to increase effort for two years, the U.S. administration needs to be careful not to appear to perpetrate aggressive war through proxies for-themselves. Why is it that legal means cannot be used to prosecute war criminals and vigilante remedies for war crimes are better?

Sarin Fog of War-Claims & Counter-Claims in Syrian Chemical Attack

While the British Parliament has voted not to support military reprisal against the Assad Government, the Assad Government has supporters that have produced video of rebels with alleged chemical weapons. Because VX and Sarin require only small quantities to produce fatality it is credible that anyone with access internationally to the lethal nerve agent could have used the stuff over the background of conventional rocket attacks further adding a fog of death to the fog of war.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783 Cameron Loses Vote to Intervene Militarily

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/video-shows-rebels-launching-gas-attack-in-syria/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAD7Aw3VWl0 Casualties of Damascus suburb chemical war

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/29/syria-iran-retaliation-threats-not-empty/2726493/

It would be good if experts commented on such particular weapons and video yet propaganda and counter-propaganda isn't rare in war for power and public opinion. Legal means for enforcing international bans on use of chemical weapons should be resolute and enforced after the war is over as war crimes proceedings. Direct intervention to safeguard human life from theoretical additional chemical attacks probably would need to follow direct evidence of the intention to perpetrate further attacks by any protagonist in the conflict rather than as an immediate reaction to the existing historical use in a Damascus suburb.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/21/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE97K0EL20130821

What is the Financial Value of Syria? Auction It to End the Conflict?

The question of what a country like Syria would sell for on the open market is probably relevant. One wonders if there are financial reasons why Syrian rebels and the 'Friends of Syria' are motivated to take over.

I have no idea how one would calculate the value of Syrian real estate, of the headwaters of the Euphrates and control of the flow of water, the buildings, various military assets and so forth, yet it must be a few billion dollars at least. Would the Assad regime be better off agreeing to list and auction of Syria to the highest bidder at ebay and move out if the offer meets minimum reasonable standards of appraised value?

An impartial highest bidder buyer of Syria could have international law enforcement on his side, and I suppose he might agree to lease certain properties to the Assad regime and even to provide law enforcement services. Alternatively President Assad could make Syria the first officially corporatist state and simply list the nation on the New York Stock Exchange and invite investors at the I.P.O. As a corporate state the government could be run by and for the plutocracy and civilians casualties that develop with a hodge podge of proxy terrorist actors implementing the will of global martinets might become de trop.

If the Syrian Government is Bumped Out, Where Would the Survivors Go?

What would happen to Syria and the region if the Assad government were to be put down by international force is evidently a current events topic.

 http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/28/20232943-what-happens-after-a-strike-on-syria-it-depends-on-how-far-the-us-goes?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

Some on thinking along the lines of chemical and explosives weapons proliferation. Others wonder if the Alawite might retire to Iran and become a new minority in greater numbers. Yet it is reasonable to consider that the Alawite might seek to upgrade their living status with waterfront property and the Lebanese highlands perhaps with hegemony over adjoining areas of Syria.

I believe one possibility is that Syrian government personnel might flee to Lebanon and expand the Hezballah presence perhaps converting that state into a new, armed and radicalized synthetic Shia-Alawwite state while Syria would be taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood and those farther to the right. Prince Bandar bin Sultan-former ambassador to the U.S. and a member of the global plutocracy has ideas about it. As a Sunni state affiliate under the influence of the Wahhabi and Saudi royals it is uncertain that it would be more stable that it was before the civil war started.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323423804579024452583045962.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/02/us/02aspen.html?_r=0 Bandar's home sold to John Paulson for $49 million

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-27/meet-saudi-arabias-bandar-bin-sultan-puppetmaster-behind-syrian-war Bandar bin Sultan offers to buy billions of Russian arms, Putin demurred

Global fracking may have altered the timing of the Hilbert Curve on world peak oil production and combined with a transition to ecospherically less harmful electro-magnetic transport Saudi oil wealth power may stabilize rather than increase proportionally. Some of course wondered if U.S. interest in Persian Gulf oil in the era before fracking led to mid-east policy that favored regime change in Iraq.

Fact Checking Sect. Kerry's 'Moral Compass' Speech

Secretary of State Kerry said that anyone that believes Syrian rebels would use nerve agent on civilians instead of the government should check their 'moral compass'. Yes it may be true that a government rather than citizens might be motivated to victimize so many generally, yet in the case of an international legion of terrorists from across the Sunni world we cannot be so certain.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23883427

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0

Al Qaeda is active in the Syrian conflict as well as other terrorist groups and there are not known to be recalcitrant over creating civilian casualties. One's moral compass may point to the World Trade Center 9-11-2001 as well as the Pentagon as examples of terrorist attacks on civilians. With the largely Sunni development of suicide bombs in the Middle East that has proliferated across the world mostly targeting civilians it is difficult for a moral compass to ignore that direction. Thousands and thousands in Iraq were killed by suicide bombings and very likely terrorist groups exploiting utilitarian and pragmatic rules would decide that sacrificing a few thousand civilians to get the United States to hand victory to them would be worth the cost.

It is also possible that some terrorist groups don't really care so much for Syrians since they aren't from Syria. It is rather instructive that Sect. Kerry has so much respect for the moral compass of terrorists that he does not consider it possible that they could get and use nerve agent on civilians in Syria, yet I am not so sure myself.

When competent and complete investigation of the cause of the use of nerve agent in the Damascus suburb is present then direct legal action with international force ought to be taken. Pitching horseshoes for causus belli of interventionist conflict isn't so good after the fact if it turns out the approximate and uncertain reason for entering into a non-proximal to U.S. interest conflict was wrong.

http://news.yahoo.com/kerry--u-s--will-respond-to-%E2%80%98moral-obscenity%E2%80%99-of-syria-massacre--193453624.html

Sect. Kerry is of a billionaire family that is a member of the global plutocracy. They tend to view the world through their own values of where what is good for-themselves is good for the poor and middle class. Russia has about 75 billionaires with a GDP of only 1.2 trillion dollars. It is understandable that President Putin has found it tough to reign in an incipient oligarchy. Public interest requires that government look out for the 150 million non-billionaire Russians as well as to serve the very few. The U.S.A. has more than 400 billionaires and China about 100. These are very influential people in business and politics that may preclude political developments that would tax or conflict with their class interests of collecting rents and consolidating wealth. Too often the environment is not protected, conserved or restored because of the influence of oligarchs.

Sect. Kerry finds civilian casualties in Syria from chemical weapons a 'moral obscenity' yet to those wound and killed by explosives and conventional weapons to a similar extent the difference between non-obscenity and obscenity is rather vague. For some all casualties of war are the obscenity rather than those killed by a particular kind of weapon.

War crimes and conventions defining war crimes do exist and respect for rule of law on those international agreements should be used instead of kangaroo court edicts by the most powerful that may or may not have a record of trustworthiness. If it becomes evident that a plain and substantive use of chemical weapons is the real policy of the Syrian or any other government in an existing war than there ought to be real time to react. That standard has just not been met in Iraq, and it is wrong to stipulate vague standards that anyone may try to get under or frame up to meet in order to precipitate international intervention of one side.

Watching the war may make Sect. Kerry feel a little like an N.F.L. referee that should intervene whenever he sees a foul. Yet that paradigm is perhaps a wrong perspective by which to view world events and the Syrian civil war. It is at any rate a little uncomfortable to consider such a policy if the U.S.A. were not the most powerful nation militarily on Earth considering the intervention. What if it was China choosing where and when to intervene and what sort of government to depose?

Syria and The Logic of Intervention Over VX or Sarin Deaths

After the death of several hundred people in a suburb of Damascus probably by contact with nerve agent calls for instant U.S. intervention in the Syrian civil war on behalf of the rebels have arisen even as the Syrian government has allowed U.N. chemical weapons to investigate the site of the event. The U.S. navy has moved warships closer offshore Syria in preparation for a possible cruise missile attack on that country as if the U.S.A. is the world's policeman.  Some are anxious to remove Assad and move custody of the trove of nerve agent to more reliable hands such as a new Muslim Brotherhood led Sunni government of Syria or get rid of the stock altogether by dispersing it around the middle east and North Africa to ad hoc Al Qaeda terror associates. Who can say? We can be sure that if Armageddon were to actualize the problem would not be comparatively substantive.

Policemen are not generally judges yet should be good investigators. Investigating the alleged rocket attack on a Syrian suburb that delivered nerve agent is just getting started. Calls for launching a war instantly as if the Poles had attacked Germany again or as if Saddam Hussein was readying to launch his nuclear weapons on New York or the North Vietnamese navy has attacked American ships in the Gulf of Tonkin bring a certain measure of familiar incredulity to citizens distrusting U.S. government credibility on such issues. Some people in government never want to hesitate with second thoughts and miss the chance to leap into the righteous glory of war upon puny powers evolving the future with a roll of the dice. And that without a clue about what a post-Assad Syria would be like in this case. Maybe it would only cost two or three billion to rebuild Syria as it would Iraq according to neo-con estimates.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23844643#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

Nerve agent is in effect a very concentrated insect poison. It is fairly easy for governments to manufacture and there is a lot of it around. The former Soviet Union probably left oceans of old artillery shells full of it in its former Republics. It does not stretch the imagination much to consider that Al Qaeda or another Sunni covert op could have acquired a cup of VX, GA or GB to use in the Syrian conflict as a way to get the U.S. military to win the war for them.

A cup of VX could kill a thousand people if optimally use as a vaporized. There are numerous ways of delivering VX from a pressurized spray canister hidden under a burka or placed in a low-flying quiet drone aircraft like a wraith painted black flying through the evening to disperse death. So even if there is are rocket remnants on site and even if there are traces of nerve agent associated with it. It should be plain that the rocket actually was the delivery vehicle of the nerve agent and not contaminated post hoc before proceeded to step two.

Step two would be finding an answer to the logical question of who it was in the Syrian Government ordered chemical a weapon to be launched? Was the order to use nerve agent one time on a particular civilian concentration a decision made by the Assad chain of command or was it a volunteer selection by a rebel sympathizing commander trying to bring U.S. intervention down upon the Assad Government forces?

Another question for Americans is that of intervention at all. Why should the U.S. government be quick to enter foreign wars on one side or the other when neither has attacked the United States of America? Neither should the U.S. government be a slow dupe easily led by plotters getting the bull to charge where they like to do their killing for them.

Syria does not yet seem much of a threat to the U.S.A. or N.A.T.O. members though an attack on Syria making the government more desperate could perhaps lead to unforeseeable consequences in the protracted development of chaotic conflict in Syria the Obama administration supported from the start. If the Assad government did launch the chemical weapon time to prosecute that regime's bad actors in the future probably will exist. I

Democrat Congressman (of N.Y.) Eliot Engall spoke out recently urging the administration to expedite attack on the Assad Government and bypass the slow legal machinery of the U.N.. He cited humanitarian and national interest reasons in promoting conflict enhancement. Even so it seems a bad idea.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57600036/on-syria-intervention-lawmakers-find-strange-bedfellows/

If the orgasm of intervening cruise missile blasts occurs the aftermath will not necessarily be development of good fruit of peace and prosperity Syria. France, the former colonial power has also urged intervention. It would be good if the French, British and other interventionists could pay for and enact military assaults against Syria for-themselves and for others concerned around the world about the developments in the Syrian war without U.S. participation for a change. The Obama administration should not be the designated hit man of special interests.

The basic concern internationally when chemical war incidents occur ought to be containment and later prosecution of particular individuals that decided to use chemical weapons in the world court. Actual decisive intervention to alter the course of war as a punishment for an alleged use of chemical war weapons as a minor element of war tactic rather than as a primary methodical approach to conducting war would seem to wrong. That is non-substantive use of chemical weapons in war would seem a cause for post-war prosecution of perpetrators by international war crimes courts whereas if chemical weapons are used in order to decisively win a war that might be a valid reason for international intervention contingent upon if the international body intervening likes or dislikes the protagonists in the war. For instance if Australians had used chemical weapons on the Nazis during World War Two (they didn't) the other allies would not have intervened on behalf of the Nazis to make the conflict fairer.

A civil war is a bloody thing and in the modern context where foreign volunteer warriors and terrorists by the thousands actively involve themselves and where a host of 'friends of Syria' have provide weapons and other material for war in addition to bucket-loads of cash the impartiality of intervention is hardly credible.

Instead of choosing who the winners and losers are in foreign conflicts not concerning our allies with copious cruise missiles and carpet bombing because of the orgasmic military pleasure of killing with a pretension of righteousness the U.S.A. should be cool on war and invest in building peaceful, renewable economic methods at home and abroad that employ the poor and restore the decaying planetary ecosphere too health with liberty and tigers for all.