Senate roundly rejects proposal to halt Egypt aid
Published July 31, 2013
Associated Press
The Senate roundly rejected a proposal Wednesday to redirect aid for Egypt into bridge-building projects in the U.S. after a potential Republican presidential candidate and tea party favorite challenged the Obama administration's refusal to label the ouster of Egypt's president a military coup.
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky's amendment to next year's transportation bill would have halted the $1.5 billion in mainly military assistance the U.S. provides Egypt each year.
He cited the U.S. law banning most forms of support for countries that suffer a military "coup," a determination the administration has said it won't make about the Egyptian army's July 3 ouster of the Islamist President Mohammed Morsi. And he invoked U.S. infrastructure shortcomings as well as Detroit's bankruptcy and Chicago's violence to make his case for the money to be put back into the domestic economy.
"Our nation's bridges are crumbling," said Paul, who has previously failed in attempts to cut U.S. support programs for Egypt, Libya and Pakistan. "I propose that we take the billion dollars that is now being illegally given to Egypt and spend it at home."
The Senate voted 86-13 against the measure, the first to be proposed in either chamber of Congress since the army arrested Morsi, suspended the constitution and cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood. A series of deadly protests have taken place since in what was once Washington's strongest ally in the Muslim world, but which has faced near constant turmoil since the revolution that toppled dictator Hosni Mubarak in 2011.
The vote laid bare a stark division among Republicans, pitting libertarians like Paul against hawks such as Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who plan to visit Egypt next week at President Obama's request to press for new elections. They were joined by Sens. Bob Corker and Jim Inhofe, the top Republicans on the Senate's foreign relations and armed services committees, in speaking out against the amendment.
"It's important that we send a message to Egypt that we're not abandoning them," McCain said. Right now, Egypt is "descending into chaos. It's going to be a threat to the United States."
Sen. Marco Rubio, a potential rival of Paul's for the GOP ticket in 2016, sought middle ground by urging Egypt's aid to be restructured to better serve U.S. interests. Paul didn't gain Rubio's vote, but he did get that of minority leader Sen. Mitch McConnell.
On Tuesday, Graham had told reporters that holding the vote at all could send the wrong signal to Egypt. Cutting off the aid could threaten Israel's security and U.S. counterterrorism efforts, while backing Paul's proposal risked giving the impression that the U.S. is indifferent to the military's actions.
The Obama administration told lawmakers last week it won't declare Egypt's government overthrow a coup, guided by similar concerns about suspending programs that secure Israel's borders and fight weapons smuggling into the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. It also fears losing its greatest source of leverage with Egypt's military leadership.
The administration's position is largely supported by Senate Democrats, who voted unanimously against Paul.
"This amendment may be good politics, but it is bad policy," said Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/31/senate-roundly-rejects-proposal-to-halt-egypt-aid/#ixzz2afuH5SYU
Thursday, 1 August 2013
Wednesday, 31 July 2013
Point and Shoot Camera Use Declines
Camera Use Declines in Favor of Smartphones, Study Says
0
0
Google +0
0
The number of photos taken with smartphones such as Apple’s iPhone rose in 2011 while camera use declined, according to a study
by research firm NPD Group. Smartphones accounted for 27 percent of
photos taken in 2011, compared with 17 percent the year before, and
camera photos fell from 52 to 44 percent, the December 22 study said.They also are being used to shoot more film, the report found, and phones are now contributing 25 percent of all photos and videos combined. More than 50 percent of “fun, casual, spontaneous” photos were taken with smartphones, compared to just higher than 30 percent of vacation photos, the study found.
The surging numbers indicate that users prefer the typically smaller, more portable devices for impromptu moments and spontaneous photography. It’s indicative of a changing atmosphere for the retail photography market, which took a downturn in 2011. Companies such as Apple and Google have included more high-powered digital cameras in their phones, epitomized by the improved 8 megapixel camera on the new iPhone 4s – a feature that drew in many buyers.
Consumers in the camera market are becoming more clearly split, the report suggests, as sales of point-and-shoot cameras and pocket camcorders decline while those for larger, removable-lens and large zoom devices increased. Lower-end handheld camera sales fell 17 percent in 2011, while removable-lens sales rose 12 percent.
http://blog.laptopmag.com/camera-use-declines-in-favor-of-smartphones-study-says
US citizens bravery
The US government may be corrupt and unethical, but it is its citizens that are fighting back. This does not mean that other nations are less corrupt and more ethical, it is the other way round.
Unfair verdict on Manning
July 30, 2013 -- Updated 2210 GMT (0610 HKT)
Army
Pfc. Bradley Manning is escorted from court on July 25, 2013 in Fort
Meade, Maryland on July 25, 2013. The trial of Manning, accused of
'aiding the enemy' by giving secret documents to WikiLeaks, is entering
its final stage Thursday as both sides present closing arguments. AFP
PHOTO/Mandel NGAN (Photo credit should read MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty
Images)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Douglas Rushkoff: Manning found guilty of espionage. Why is whistle-blowing punishable?
- He says U.S. government hasn't faced it can't control info in digital age of easy access
- He says Manning exposed objectionable official actions of U.S.--not secrets, but approaches
- Rushkoff: The transparency of a digital age means U.S. has no choice but to do right thing
Editor's note: Douglas Rushkoff writes a regular column for CNN.com. He is a media theorist and the author of the new book "Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now."
(CNN) -- Pfc. Bradley Manning, who provided
classified government documents to Wikileaks detailing, among other
things, America's undisclosed policies on torture, was found guilty of
espionage on Tuesday. The verdict comes on the 235th anniversary
of the passage of America's first whistle-blower protection law,
approved by the Continental Congress after two Navy officers were
arrested and harassed for having reported the torture of British
prisoners.
How have we gotten to the
place where the revelation of torture is no longer laudable
whistle-blowing, but now counts as espionage?
The answer is that
government has not yet come to terms with the persistence and
transparency of the digital age. Information moves so fast and to so
many places that controlling it is no longer an option. Every datapoint,
whether a perverted tweet by an aspiring mayor or a classified video of
Reuters news staffers being gunned down by an Apache helicopter, will
somehow find the light of day. It's enough to make any administration
tremble, but it's particularly traumatic for one with things to hide.
Douglas Rushkoff
That's why they tried to throw the book, and then some, at Manning.
Prosecutors cast simple Internet commands known to any halfway literate Internet user
(or anyone who used the Internet back in the early '90s) as clandestine
codes used only by hackers to steal data. That Osama bin Laden could
download these files off the Wikileaks website (along with millions of
other people) became justification for classifying the whistle-blowing
as espionage, an act of war. And Manning is just one of a record seven Americans charged with violating the Espionage Act in a single administration.
But prosecuting those
whose keyboards or USB sticks may have been technically responsible for
the revelations is futile. The more networked we become and the more
data we collect, the more likely something will eventually find its way
out. After all, a security culture based on surveillance and big data
cuts both ways.
Moreover, harsh reaction
to digital whistle-blowers only increases the greater population's
suspicions that more information is being hidden.
Manning not guilty of aiding enemy
Manning smiles after hearing verdict
Manning not guilty of aiding enemy
Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
In this one leaking incident, Manning exposed allegations of torture, undisclosed civilian death tolls in Afghanistan and Iraq, official orders not to investigate torture by nations holding our prisoners, accusations of the torture of Spanish prisoners at Guantanamo, the "collateral murder" video of Reuters journalists and Iraqi civilians as U.S. soldiers cheered, U.S. State Department support of corporations opposing Haitian minimum wage, training of Egyptian torturers by the FBI in Quantico, Virginia, U.S. authorized stealing of U.N. Secretary General's DNA -- the list goes on.
These are not launch
codes for nuclear strikes, operational secrets or even plans for future
military missions. Rather, they are documentation of past activity and
officially sanctioned military and state policy. These are not our
secrets, but our ongoing actions and approaches.
A thinking government--a
virtuous one, if we can still use such a word--would treat this as a
necessary intervention. Things have gone too far. But ours is a
government in "present shock": an always-on, always-connected population
puts the administration in a state of perpetual emergency interruption.
It's not the phone call at 2 a.m. for which a president has to be
prepared, but the tweet at 3, the Facebook update at 4, the YouTube
video at 5, and on and on.
In such a
crisis-to-crisis landscape, there's no time to implement or even
articulate a "grand narrative." A real-time, digital world offers no
sense of mission or opportunity to tell a story. There's no Cold War to
win. No moon shot to work toward. There are just emergent threats, one
after the other after the other. Things just exist in the present, one
tweet - or, actually, many tweets - at a time.
This makes it
exceedingly difficult to frame our policies and strategies with language
and purpose. It's no longer a matter of walking the talk. Without the
talk, there's only the walk. We have no way of judging the ethics and
intentions of our government except by what it actually does.
Combine this with the
transparency that comes with digital technology and our leaders simply
have no choice but to do the right thing. It takes more energy to
prevent exposure than simply to behave consistently with the values we
want to project.
Just as corporations are
learning that they can no longer maintain low prices through overseas
slave labor without getting caught, a democratic government can no
longer maintain security through torture and coercion without being
exposed. Betraying our respect for human dignity only makes us less
resolved as a people, and less trusted as a nation.
We are just beginning to
learn what makes a free people secure in a digital age. It really is
different. The Cold War was an era of paper records, locked vaults and
state secrets, for which a cloak-and-dagger mindset may have been
appropriate. In a digital environment, our security comes not from our
ability to keep our secrets but rather our ability to live our truth.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Douglas Rushkoff.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/30/opinion/rushkoff-manning-verdict/
Friday, 26 July 2013
Nonsense published in Nature Magazine
It is trivial to conclude that you can plant any memory to a brain but to conclude. Planting memories is equivalent to humans falsifying memories is just nonsense and without any basis at all. Humans have the ability to lie i.e. create stories. These memories don't need to be planted.
Scientists can implant false memories into mice
Optical fibres implanted in a mouse's brain activated memory forming cells
False memories have been implanted into mice, scientists say.
A team was able to make the mice wrongly associate a benign
environment with a previous unpleasant experience from different
surroundings.The researchers conditioned a network of neurons to respond to light, making the mice recall the unpleasant environment.
Reporting in Science, they say it could one day shed light into how false memories occur in humans.
The brains of genetically engineered mice were implanted with optic fibres in order to deliver pulses of light to their brain. Known as optogenetics, this technique is able to make individual neurons respond to light.
Unreliable memory
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
Dr Xu Liu Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyOur memory changes every single time it's being recorded. That's why we can incorporate new information into old memories and this is how a false memory can form...”
Just like in mice, our memories
are stored in collections of cells, and when events are recalled we
reconstruct parts of these cells - almost like re-assembling small
pieces of a puzzle.
It has been well documented that human memory is highly
unreliable, first highlighted by a study on eyewitness testimonies in
the 70s. Simple changes in how a question was asked could influence the
memory a witness had of an event such as a car crash. When this was brought to public attention, eyewitness testimonies alone were no longer used as evidence in court. Many people wrongly convicted on memory statements were later exonerated by DNA evidence.
Xu Liu of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and one the lead authors of the study, said that when mice recalled a false memory, it was indistinguishable from the real memory in the way it drove a fear response in the memory forming cells of a mouse's brain.
Continue reading the main story
How a memory was implanted in a mouse
- A mouse was put in one environment (blue box) and the brain cells encoding memory were labelled in this environment (white circles)
- These cells were then made responsive to light
- The animal was placed in a different environment (the red box) and light was delivered into the brain to activate these labelled cells
- This induced the recall of the first environment - the blue box. While the animal was recalling the first environment, they also received mild foot shocks
- Later when the mouse was put back into the first environment, it showed behavioural signs of fear, indicating it had formed a false fear memory for the first environment, where it was never shocked in reality
The mouse is the closest animal
scientists can easily use to analyse the brain, as though simpler, its
structure and basic circuitry is very similar to the human brain.
Studying neurons in a mouse's brain could therefore help
scientists further understand how similar structures in the human brain
work. "In the English language there are only 26 letters, but the combinations of letters make unlimited words and sentences, this is also true for memories," Dr Liu told BBC News.
Evolving memories "There are so many brain cells and for each individual memory, different combinations of small populations of cells are activated."
These differing combinations of cells could partly explain why memories are not static like a photograph, but constantly evolving, he added.
Continue reading the main story
Mice have previously been trained to believe they were
somewhere else, "a bit like the feeling of deja-vu we sometimes get",
said Rosamund Langson from Dundee University.
A possibility in the future is erasing memories, she told BBC News.
"Episodic memories - such as those for traumatic experiences - are distributed in neurons throughout the brain, and in order to make memory erasure a safe and useful tool, we must understand how the different components of each memory are put together.
"You may want to erase someone's memory for a traumatic event that happened in their home, but you certainly do not want to erase their memory for how to find their way around their home."
Erasing memories?
A possibility in the future is erasing memories, she told BBC News.
"Episodic memories - such as those for traumatic experiences - are distributed in neurons throughout the brain, and in order to make memory erasure a safe and useful tool, we must understand how the different components of each memory are put together.
"You may want to erase someone's memory for a traumatic event that happened in their home, but you certainly do not want to erase their memory for how to find their way around their home."
"If you want to grab a specific
memory you have to get down into the cell level. Every time we think we
remember something, we could also be making changes to that memory -
sometimes we realise sometimes we don't," Dr Liu explained.
"Our memory changes every single time it's being 'recorded'.
That's why we can incorporate new information into old memories and this
is how a false memory can form without us realising it."Susumu Tonegawa of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said his teams' work provided the first animal model in which false and genuine memories could be investigated in the cells which store memories, called engram-bearing cells.
"Humans are highly imaginative animals. Just like our mice, an aversive or appetitive event could be associated with a past experience one may happen to have in mind at that moment, hence a false memory is formed."
Silencing fear Neil Burgess from University College London, who was not involved with the work, told BBC News the study was an "impressive example" of creating a fearful response in an environment where nothing fearful happened.
"One day this type of knowledge may help scientists to understand how to remove or reduce the fearful associations experienced by people with conditions like post traumatic stress disorder."
But he added that it's only an advance in "basic neuroscience" and that these methods could not be directly applied to humans for many years.
"But basic science always helps in the end, and it may be possible, one day, to use similar techniques to silence neurons causing the association to fear."
'Diseases of thought' Mark Mayford of the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego, US, said: "The question is, how does the brain change with experience? That's the heart of everything the brain does.
He explained that work like this could one day further help us to understand the structure of our thoughts and the cells involved.
"Then one can begin to look at those brain circuits, see how they change, and hopefully find the areas or mechanisms that change with learning."
"The implications are potentially interventions for diseases of thought such as schizophrenia. You cannot approach schizophrenia unless you know how a perception is put together."
How can Muslims demand help from USA?
After lying about US and the West about them being anti Islam, how can they now demand help?
Of course, the West will help only if their interests are served, and they are indeed selfish, but normal human beings will do the same thing. We must all protect our interests first. But protecting our interests include helping our neighbours who are in need.
What do Muslims do to protect Muslim interests? Nothing. They don't even help their neighbours who are also Muslims.
Syrian refugees demand help from Kerry at Jordan camp
ZAATARI REFUGEE CAMP, Jordan |
(Reuters) - Syrian refugees angrily told U.S. Secretary of State John
Kerry on Thursday that the United States should set up a no-fly zone and
safe havens in Syria to protect them.Visiting a camp that holds roughly 115,000 Syrian refugees in Jordan about 12 km (eight miles) from the Syrian border, Kerry spent about 40 minutes with half a dozen refugees who vented their frustration at the international community's failure to end Syria's more than two-year-old civil war.
He told them Washington was considering various options, including buffer zones for their protection, but that the situation was complex and much was still under consideration.
"Where is the international community? What are you waiting for?" a Syrian woman, who did not give her name, told Kerry at the United Nations' Zaatari refugee camp. "We hope that you will not go back to the States before you find a solution to the crisis. At least impose a no-fly zone or an embargo.
"The U.S., as a superpower, can change the equation in Syria in 30 minutes after you return to Washington."
Waving a pen in the air and tapping it on the table, the woman referred to the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, which ends in three weeks. She said: "Mr. Secretary, if the situation remains unchanged until the end of Ramadan this camp will become empty. We will return to Syria and we will fight with knives.
"You, as the U.S. government look to Israel with respect. Cannot you do the same with the children of Syria?
NOT "CUT AND DRY"
Kerry made an aerial tour of the tents and pre-fabricated, container-like homes that form by far the biggest camp for Syrians in Jordan. Meeting refugees afterward in a fenced-off administrative section, he acknowledged the anger.
"They are frustrated and angry at the world for not stepping in and helping," Kerry told reporters.
"I explained to them I don't think it's as cut and dry and as simple as some of them look at it. But if I were in their shoes I would be looking for help from wherever I could find it."
Kerry did not enter the area of the vast camp where the refugees live, but kept to the adjacent, fenced-off administrative area where humanitarian officials work and live. The half dozen refugees came to meet Kerry in a conference room within the administrative zone.
"We are not satisfied with the American answer. We never were. We just need ... action," a second woman told reporters after meeting Kerry.
During the meeting, Kerry told the refugees that many young Americans had died or lost their limbs "fighting for the freedom of Iraq" and "fighting for the freedom of Afghanistan".
After the request for buffer and no-fly zones, Kerry said: "A lot of different options are under consideration. I wish it was very simple. As you know, we've been fighting two wars for 12 years. We are trying to help in various ways, including helping Syrian opposition fighters have weapons.
"We are doing new things. There is consideration of buffer zones and other things but it is not as simple as it sounds."
U.S. EFFORTS
Kerry noted U.S. concerns about the help being given to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad by Iran and its Lebanese ally Hezbollah. He also lamented divisions among the opposition.
"It is very unfortunate and very sad to see that the opposition is not in agreement," he said. "People are being slaughtered. Women are being raped.
"Everyone looks at what the opposition is doing and then forgets the crimes of Bashar al-Assad."
He said President Barack Obama's administration was doing all it could, including helping the refugees in Jordan.
"President Obama, I think two months ago, made a decision to significantly increase American assistance in many different ways," Kerry said. "And we are doing everything we can to help Syrians be able to fight for Syria."
Noting U.S. aid to the camp, he added: "You are not abandoned. We are very aware of how terrible conditions are inside Syria.
"I promise you I will take your voices and concerns back with me to Washington as we continue to work with our friends in ways that can be helpful."
Jordan has been host to big U.N. camps for Palestinian refugees for more than six decades.
The administrator at Zaatari, Kilian Kleinschmidt, was asked by reporters how long his camp would remain open for Syrians. He replied: "Three days. Thirty years. Who knows?"
(Editing by Alastair Macdonald)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/18/us-syria-crisis-kerry-refugees-idUSBRE96H0DF20130718
What do Muslims do to help Syrians?
Muslims only know how to lie about America and the West.
U.S. uses Syrian rebel supply lines as it prepares to send arms
WASHINGTON |
(Reuters) - The United States has quietly been testing the Syrian
opposition's ability to deliver food rations, medical kits and money to
rebel-held areas as Washington prepares to send arms to the rebel
fighters.U.S. officials meet weekly in Turkey with Syrian opposition leaders to work out how best to keep supply lines open to rebel fighters and war-ravaged towns and districts.
One of the Syrian opposition's best-known female leaders, Suhair al-Atassi, attends the meetings as coordinator of the "non-lethal" aid that includes equipment for rebel fighters and local councils, as opposed to humanitarian aid for the displaced.
Supplies are handed to officers of the moderate Free Syrian Army (FSA) at clandestine locations that cannot be divulged for security reasons.
"I sign the paperwork, and shake the hands of the FSA official," said a U.S. State Department official involved in the effort. "I wish them well and walk away."
The rebels take aid for their own units and also distribute some of it to schools, clinics and local councils.
The United States has committed $250 million in non-lethal aid to Syria in addition to the $815 million in humanitarian assistance in support of the rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad's forces.
Recently, Washington began scaling up its assistance to bigger items like trucks, radios, large generators and sophisticated medical equipment.
Some of it is not only aimed at helping fighters but also at supporting civilian authorities in towns that have rejected Assad's rule.
"We are just now starting to send large equipment over the border for local councils and cities in liberated areas," the U.S. official said.
Syria's civil war has killed more than 100,000 people and forced millions to flee their homes. The involvement of Iran and its Lebanese ally Hezbollah in the conflict has shifted the balance of power on the battlefield in favor of Assad, increasing frustration among rebels over delays in the United States sending weapons to them.
With no U.S. diplomatic presence on the ground, Syria presents a unique challenge for aid coordinators.
U.S. officials say they rely on a network of some 75 young Syrians who collect information in rebel-held areas and report back to Atassi's unit. The information is often corroborated with U.N. groups.
SUPPLYING WEAPONS
The U.S. Congress cleared the way earlier this month for Washington to give the rebels not just non-lethal and humanitarian aid but also weapons. Lawmakers have only approved limited funding for the arms operation, as they fear that U.S. weapons and ammunition could end up in the hands of hardline Islamist militant groups.
"One of our main issues is to make sure that, whatever we do, that nothing gets in the hands of al Qaeda," said Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.
To keep track of the non-lethal aid already going into Syria, American officials ask the opposition to bring back photographic evidence of deliveries as proof that the goods made it into the right hands.
"If we are providing small amounts of cash to a local council to pay salaries we insist on signatures and photographs," said the official. "One of the ways to minimize the risk is we keep the amounts of cash small and would pay something like a stipend rather than a salary."
While it is not always easy to guarantee that supplies reach their intended recipients or that they don't eventually make their way to the black market, the Syrian opposition coordinators have begun to earn the trust of U.S. officials.
"They have so far passed the test," the official said.
France also sends supplies to the rebels, including envelopes stuffed with money handed over at the Turkish border.
(Reporting by Lesley Wroughton; Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Alistair Bell and Eric Beech)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/25/us-syria-crisis-usa-idUSBRE96O1H020130725
Tuesday, 23 July 2013
The price of US involvement in Syria
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/07/22/dempsey-letter-to-mccain-and-levin-on-syria/2576481/
Gen. Martin Dempsey made clear that he was just presenting options and the decision is for civilian leaders to make.
Dempsey's letter to Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is the most comprehensive public description yet of the stark choices the administration faces in responding to a civil war that has lasted more than two years, has led to the deaths of 100,000 and has confounded U.S. policymakers.
Dempsey provided the options in response to a request from Levin and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a ranking Republican member of the committee, which is considering his nomination for a second term as chairman.
Dempsey came under fire last week from McCain, who sharply questioned Dempsey during his confirmation hearing. Dempsey had been reluctant to publicly discuss options while the White House is still reviewing them. McCain has advocated for a stronger response to the civil war in Syria.
The White House has been reluctant to get too deeply involved in the conflict. The U.S. government is providing non-lethal aid to rebels and recently the White House said it would begin providing arms and other support for rebels.
The options outlined by Dempsey would involve a much deeper involvement by U.S. forces, carrying with them high costs and significant risks.
The options outlined by Dempsey include:
• Train, advise and assist the opposition. Ground troops would be used to train rebels in tactics and the employment of weapons. The number of troops required ranges from several hundred to thousands. It would require establishing safe zones outside Syria and would cost an estimated $500 million a year initially.
The plan risks inadvertently helping extremist groups who are among the rebel groups fighting the regime of Bashar Assad, Dempsey said. It could also provoke cross border raids by Syrian government forces and could result in insider attacks against U.S. forces.
• Stand-off strikes. Aircraft and missiles would be used to attack hundreds of Syrian government military targets, such as air defense systems and regime air and naval forces.
This option would require the United States and its allies to muster "hundreds of aircraft, ships, submarines, and other enablers," Dempsey wrote. It risks provoking retaliatory strikes by the Assad regime and could also result in inadvertent civilian casualties, he said.
• No-fly zone. This option would be designed to ground Assad's aircraft, preventing them from attacking civilians and rebels. It would also stop Assad from supplying his forces by air. This option would require knocking out the Syrian air defenses and attacking Syrian aircraft on the ground and in the air. It could cost as much as $1 billion a month for a year.
This option could result in the loss of U.S. aircraft, he said. It may also fail to reduce violence or shift the balance of power on the ground, since Assad's forces rely heavily on mortars and artillery -- not only aircraft -- to attack rebels.
• Buffer zones. This option calls for the establishment of sanctuaries for rebel forces outside Syria, most likely in neighboring Turkey or Jordan. The zones would allow rebels to train and humanitarian aid could be distributed to refugees.
"Thousands of U.S. ground forces would be needed, even if positioned outside Syria, to support those physically defending the zones," Dempsey wrote. It would also require a limited no-fly zone to prevent attack from Assad's aircraft. The cost would exceed $1 billion a month.
The risks include Assad's forces firing artillery into the zones and killing refugees. "The zones could also become operational bases for extremists," Dempsey wrote.
• Control chemical weapons. This plan calls for destroying portions of Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons, interdicting their shipment around the country and seizing and securing weapons components. It would require establishing a no-fly zone and launching air and missile strikes "involving hundreds of aircraft, ships, submarines and other enablers," Dempsey said. "Thousands of special operation forces and other ground forces would be needed to assault and secure critical sites."
The costs could exceed $1 billion a month, he said.
"Once we take action, we should be prepared for what comes next," Dempsey wrote.
Dempsey gives details on U.S. options in Syria
WASHINGTON – The Pentagon has prepared military options for responding to the Syrian crisis ranging from bombing targets inside the country to deploying thousands of ground forces to secure chemical weapons sites, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a letter to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.Gen. Martin Dempsey made clear that he was just presenting options and the decision is for civilian leaders to make.
Dempsey's letter to Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is the most comprehensive public description yet of the stark choices the administration faces in responding to a civil war that has lasted more than two years, has led to the deaths of 100,000 and has confounded U.S. policymakers.
Dempsey provided the options in response to a request from Levin and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a ranking Republican member of the committee, which is considering his nomination for a second term as chairman.
Dempsey came under fire last week from McCain, who sharply questioned Dempsey during his confirmation hearing. Dempsey had been reluctant to publicly discuss options while the White House is still reviewing them. McCain has advocated for a stronger response to the civil war in Syria.
The White House has been reluctant to get too deeply involved in the conflict. The U.S. government is providing non-lethal aid to rebels and recently the White House said it would begin providing arms and other support for rebels.
The options outlined by Dempsey would involve a much deeper involvement by U.S. forces, carrying with them high costs and significant risks.
The options outlined by Dempsey include:
• Train, advise and assist the opposition. Ground troops would be used to train rebels in tactics and the employment of weapons. The number of troops required ranges from several hundred to thousands. It would require establishing safe zones outside Syria and would cost an estimated $500 million a year initially.
The plan risks inadvertently helping extremist groups who are among the rebel groups fighting the regime of Bashar Assad, Dempsey said. It could also provoke cross border raids by Syrian government forces and could result in insider attacks against U.S. forces.
• Stand-off strikes. Aircraft and missiles would be used to attack hundreds of Syrian government military targets, such as air defense systems and regime air and naval forces.
This option would require the United States and its allies to muster "hundreds of aircraft, ships, submarines, and other enablers," Dempsey wrote. It risks provoking retaliatory strikes by the Assad regime and could also result in inadvertent civilian casualties, he said.
• No-fly zone. This option would be designed to ground Assad's aircraft, preventing them from attacking civilians and rebels. It would also stop Assad from supplying his forces by air. This option would require knocking out the Syrian air defenses and attacking Syrian aircraft on the ground and in the air. It could cost as much as $1 billion a month for a year.
This option could result in the loss of U.S. aircraft, he said. It may also fail to reduce violence or shift the balance of power on the ground, since Assad's forces rely heavily on mortars and artillery -- not only aircraft -- to attack rebels.
• Buffer zones. This option calls for the establishment of sanctuaries for rebel forces outside Syria, most likely in neighboring Turkey or Jordan. The zones would allow rebels to train and humanitarian aid could be distributed to refugees.
"Thousands of U.S. ground forces would be needed, even if positioned outside Syria, to support those physically defending the zones," Dempsey wrote. It would also require a limited no-fly zone to prevent attack from Assad's aircraft. The cost would exceed $1 billion a month.
The risks include Assad's forces firing artillery into the zones and killing refugees. "The zones could also become operational bases for extremists," Dempsey wrote.
• Control chemical weapons. This plan calls for destroying portions of Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons, interdicting their shipment around the country and seizing and securing weapons components. It would require establishing a no-fly zone and launching air and missile strikes "involving hundreds of aircraft, ships, submarines and other enablers," Dempsey said. "Thousands of special operation forces and other ground forces would be needed to assault and secure critical sites."
The costs could exceed $1 billion a month, he said.
"Once we take action, we should be prepared for what comes next," Dempsey wrote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)