Prévenez le Monde : le New York Times a sifflé la fin de la récréation ce matin. L’« Editorial Board » te fait savoir qu’il faut pas y aller : More Answers Needed on Syria
▻http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/opinion/more-answers-needed-on-syria.html
Mr. Obama has yet to make clear how military strikes — which officials say will last one to two days and target military units that carried out chemical attacks, the headquarters overseeing the effort and the artillery that have launched the attacks — will actually deter chemical attacks without further inflaming a region in turmoil and miring the United States in the Syrian civil war.
Any action, military or otherwise, must be tailored to advance a political settlement between the Assad regime and the opposition, the only rational solution to the conflict. If military action has a broader strategic purpose and is part of a coherent diplomatic plan, Mr. Obama needs to explain it.
Et de toute façon, les fabuleuses preuves contre Assad vont ressembler à « un modeste communiqué de presse » : U.S. Facing Test on Data to Back Action on Syria
▻http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/us-facing-test-on-data-to-back-action-on-syria.html
And yet it appears that the public presentation of the Syria evidence will be limited. Instead of the theater of Mr. Powell’s 2003 speech — which included satellite photographs, scratchy recordings of conversations between Iraqi officials and a vial of white powder meant to symbolize anthrax — American officials said the intelligence assessment they are preparing to make public will be similar to a modest news release that the White House issued in June to announce that the Assad government had used chemical weapons “on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year.”
Based on that conclusion, Mr. Obama authorized a limited program of supplying the Syrian rebels with arms, which have yet to arrive.
