Does Obama Actually Have a Red Line on Syria?
Syria has been driving up to and over President Obama's red lines for months now.
Back in December, a State Department fact-finding mission discovered evidence of Syrian chemical weapons use.
In January, Josh Rogin of Foreign Policy broke news of the mission's discoveries - which led to an embarrassing back and forth in which the administration first claimed that Rogin had misreported, then had to back down.
The December events now look like a deliberate Syrian test. They concluded that they could get away with more - and now they are trying again.
President Obama said Wednesday that the United States was investigating claims that chemical weapons had been used in Syria the day before and that he was “deeply skeptical” of the Syrian government’s assertion that the insurgency had deployed such weapons.
Get the best of The Beast delivered right to your inbox
By clicking “SUBSCRIBE” you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
President Obama does not want to intervene overtly in Syria. We all get that. But then why raise the possibility that he might? Issuing threats on which the president is not firmly committed to act if necessary is dangerous.
See more of our coverage in your search results.
Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast here.
Register below to read this article for free or subscribe
to unlock unlimited access to The Daily Beast.
Monthly
$1
First month then $5.99/month
Annual
$35
First year then $59.99/year
Premium
$79
First year then $119.99/year
*Substack access provided by the next business day, using your subscription email. Choosing the Premium plan constitutes your permission to share your subscription email with Substack and your agreement to Substack’s Privacy Policy.
Already have an account? Sign In
Looks like you already have a subscription!
You're all set!
Thanks for subscribing.