

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Asked by Senate Robert Menendez (D-NJ) whether or not language should be inserted in a congressional authorization for an attack on Syria that would prohibit 'U.S. boots on the ground,' U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that would not be good idea. Kerry stammered, and then declared--"in the event Syria imploded, for instance"--that he wouldn't want to take that option "off the table" by inserting such a clause.
The exchange occurred as Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff Adm. Martin Dempsey delivered testimony about the Obama administration's push for military action--also known as war--against Syria before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday.
In a follow-up question on the issue, Kerry said he wanted to "shut the door" on the impression left by his previous answer regarding boots on the ground.
"All I did was raise a hypothetical question about some possibility, and I'm thinking out loud about how to protect American interests," he said. Then added, "There will not be boots on the ground with respect to the civil war." Whether that calculation would change "with respect" to some deeper conflict was not clear.
Later, after being handed a folded piece paper from a staff aid, Kerry once again returned to his comments about the possibility of U.S. troops on the ground in Syria to reiterate that his earlier comments were simply "hypothetical" and not reflective of administration policy.
However, pressed by Sen. James Risch (R-ID) on what would happen "if this thing gets away from us" in Syria, Kerry again pushed off a direct answer, arguing that Assad would simply be crazy to respond to a U.S. assault on its military or sovereign territory.
Throughout the afternoon testimony, neither Kerry, Hagel, or Dempsey were eager to engage in the "what next?" question posed by senators from either side of the aisle.
___________________________________________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Asked by Senate Robert Menendez (D-NJ) whether or not language should be inserted in a congressional authorization for an attack on Syria that would prohibit 'U.S. boots on the ground,' U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that would not be good idea. Kerry stammered, and then declared--"in the event Syria imploded, for instance"--that he wouldn't want to take that option "off the table" by inserting such a clause.
The exchange occurred as Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff Adm. Martin Dempsey delivered testimony about the Obama administration's push for military action--also known as war--against Syria before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday.
In a follow-up question on the issue, Kerry said he wanted to "shut the door" on the impression left by his previous answer regarding boots on the ground.
"All I did was raise a hypothetical question about some possibility, and I'm thinking out loud about how to protect American interests," he said. Then added, "There will not be boots on the ground with respect to the civil war." Whether that calculation would change "with respect" to some deeper conflict was not clear.
Later, after being handed a folded piece paper from a staff aid, Kerry once again returned to his comments about the possibility of U.S. troops on the ground in Syria to reiterate that his earlier comments were simply "hypothetical" and not reflective of administration policy.
However, pressed by Sen. James Risch (R-ID) on what would happen "if this thing gets away from us" in Syria, Kerry again pushed off a direct answer, arguing that Assad would simply be crazy to respond to a U.S. assault on its military or sovereign territory.
Throughout the afternoon testimony, neither Kerry, Hagel, or Dempsey were eager to engage in the "what next?" question posed by senators from either side of the aisle.
___________________________________________________

Asked by Senate Robert Menendez (D-NJ) whether or not language should be inserted in a congressional authorization for an attack on Syria that would prohibit 'U.S. boots on the ground,' U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that would not be good idea. Kerry stammered, and then declared--"in the event Syria imploded, for instance"--that he wouldn't want to take that option "off the table" by inserting such a clause.
The exchange occurred as Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff Adm. Martin Dempsey delivered testimony about the Obama administration's push for military action--also known as war--against Syria before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday.
In a follow-up question on the issue, Kerry said he wanted to "shut the door" on the impression left by his previous answer regarding boots on the ground.
"All I did was raise a hypothetical question about some possibility, and I'm thinking out loud about how to protect American interests," he said. Then added, "There will not be boots on the ground with respect to the civil war." Whether that calculation would change "with respect" to some deeper conflict was not clear.
Later, after being handed a folded piece paper from a staff aid, Kerry once again returned to his comments about the possibility of U.S. troops on the ground in Syria to reiterate that his earlier comments were simply "hypothetical" and not reflective of administration policy.
However, pressed by Sen. James Risch (R-ID) on what would happen "if this thing gets away from us" in Syria, Kerry again pushed off a direct answer, arguing that Assad would simply be crazy to respond to a U.S. assault on its military or sovereign territory.
Throughout the afternoon testimony, neither Kerry, Hagel, or Dempsey were eager to engage in the "what next?" question posed by senators from either side of the aisle.
___________________________________________________