In a small article published by the WSJ, it disclosed, according to testimony, that General Dempsey (CJCS), General Petraeus (CIA) and Secretary Clinton (DoS) all came on the side of a limited military help for the Syrian rebels fighting Assad during a meeting that was held late last year. The question then becomes: Did Biden, Panetta, Kerry, Denilon, Brennan, and Holder argue against helping Syrian opposition defeat the Assad regime?
Because the same article failed to mention those who opposed Clinton, Petraeus and Dempsey on this score.
However, on foreign policy matters, present in the situation room would be the Principles staff most likely to help the President come to a decision on any national security matter. From that list, one can assume that VP Joseph Biden (WH), Secretary Leon Panetta (DoD), Senator John Kerry (SFRC), NSA Thomas Denilon (NSC), Homeland Security Advisor John Brennan (HS), and Attorney General Eric Holder (DoJ) all came on the wrong side of history by opposing the defeat of the most violent man in the Middle East region.
When you ignore people fighting for their lives, they will end up ignoring you when they arm themselves with the Koran and weapons to support their ideologies. This is a region that boasts a 350 million Sunni population with the richest governments in the world. What do you think this combination might produce other than immense Jihadi violence and nurturing?
Attorney General Eric Holder would have provided the legal framework for a US non-support of any opposition to Baschar al-Assad.
This was nothing but a missed opportunity. Ignoring the human trespasses of Assad has been responsible for increased Jihadist activities in the Levant.
It was also possible that Ambassador Susan Rice (UN) may also have weighed-in against the decision if she was present at this meeting of Principles, which usually includes UN Ambassadors as well.