[Benjamin]

What the U.S. military knows of Syria
Friday, September 6, 2013, http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll.../-1/FOSOPINION


U.S. military officers have deep doubts about impact, wisdom of a U.S. strike on Syria
By Ernesto Londoño,August 29, 2013, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...y-strike-assad

Gen. Dempsey Responds to Levin's Request for Assessment of Options for Use of U.S. Military Force in Syria - 19.07.13 http://www.levin.senate.gov/download...2-c47d943b1db6

Monday, September 2nd, 2013
Pentagon pushback: Joint Chiefs said to oppose Obama’s Syria strike order
http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/09/...-strike-order/

Latest Martin Dempsey News:
http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/wh...in-dempsey.htm

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey has told Obama that a strike on Syria will end in involvement with Iran and Russia. Senator John McCain responded that Dempsey’s warnings are “disingenuous.” (=unaufrichtig , unredlich)
by Maggie • September 2, 2013
http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birth...d-2466352.html

US military intervention in Syria would create 'unintended consequences'
General Martin Dempsey, top military officer, warns senators that each option under consideration would be costly and uncertain
Spencer Ackerman, Monday 22 July 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...rvention-syria


General Dempsey's warnings could go unheeded if Obama opts to strike
A multi-tour command veteran of the Iraq war, Dempsey has repeatedly highlighted the risks of US involvement in Syria
Spencer Ackerman, Thursday 29 August 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ey-obama-syria

President Obama could lose big on Syria in House
By JOHN BRESNAHAN and JAKE SHERMAN | 9/5/13

the resolution to bomb Syria has only a “30 to 40 percent chance of passing right now.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2eC8Hb2Bd

House Might Not Vote on Obama’s Syria Resolution
By John Fund, September 6, 2013, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...tion-john-fund

Congressional aides in both parties tell me that the chances of President Obama winning House approval for military action in Syria are so bad they actually doubt the House would ultimately vote on it if failure seemed certain.

The Washington Post’s more conservative count stands at 204 “no” votes, only 13 short of the majority needed to kill the president’s request.

undecided members — the moderate Republicans and the Democrats who usually vote with fellow Democrats and Obama — keep coming out of classified and unclassified briefings even less likely to support the plan.

Upon coming out of a classified briefing on Thursday, Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-N.H.) said that she was opposed to a strike on Syria "now more than ever."

And the public is even further behind. Just 29% of Americans support military strikes on Syria, while 48% oppose, according to a Pew Research Center poll released on Tuesday. Obama said that he will address the nation from the Oval Office on Tuesday night. But how many people will one address really persuade?

Quelle: Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/syria...#ixzz2eCFA7ijp


Majority of House leaning ‘no’ on Syria resolution
By Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake, Published: September 6,

As of Friday afternoon, there were 223 members in the “no” or “leaning no” category, more than the 217 that would be needed to sink the resolution. (The threshold for passage in the House is 217 votes, rather than the usual 218, since there are currently two vacancies.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...n-in-congress/

Wenn nur 2,7% der 223 Ablehner zu Unterstützern würden, dann gäbe es ein Patt (Nach den Zahlen der washingtonpost.com)

News-Suche zu House+vote+Syria: https://www.google.de/#q=House+vote+Syria&tbs=qdr:d

Timing:

US-Senatsabstimmung: 11.09.13

US-Repräsentantenhaus: House, which currently has 433 members, with two seats vacant. 216,5 ist die Hälfte. Also 217 = Mehrheit.
Next Meeting: Sept. 9, 2013 http://beta.congress.gov/

The resolution may not reach the chamber until the week of Sept. 16. Also that week, the UN may report on the laboratory analysis of samples collected by a UN chemical weapons inspection team at the site of the Aug. 21 attack. The team won’t make a judgment on who initiated the assault.

That timetable approaches the start of UN General Assembly session, which Obama is scheduled to address Sept. 24. A U.S. attack just before or during the UN session would risk a stream of speeches critical of the U.S., which would undercut any message Obama may hope to send Assad and his supporters. The inspectors’ report will be important for U.S. allies, most of whom haven’t supported a strike publicly so far.
Geküzt zitiert aus: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...ine-grows.html

Barack Obama may not be able to seek overall congressional support for an attack on Syria for as long as a fortnight, amid signs he has failed to build an international alliance at the G20 and still faces the prospect of heavy defeat in the House of Representatives.

Unless both Houses adopted the same resolution, which is unlikely, additional time would also be required to synchronise the two resolutions in order for a unified congressional position on the limits of force to emerge.

The slow timetable would give the White House longer to win over opinion, as well as increase the possibility that the UN weapons inspectors will report definitively on whether chemical weapons were used on 21 August.

Quelle: Obama may have to wait two weeks for Congress vote on Syria http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ess-vote-syria

Damit ist wohl gemeint, dass frühestens in the week of Sept. 23 ein Kongressergebnis vorliegen dürfte? 11.09.13 + 2 Wochen = 25.09.13.

DAX:






Dow Jones Industrial Average Index (Price) (USD)





Indexvergleich:



EUR/USD:





Vergleich DOW und EUR/USD: