Or something.
Remember when Donald Rumsfeld said the following in the run-up to the Iraq War?
It actually made sense to anybody with an IQ above 80 who was inclined to listen to a Republican, which is why our friends on the left mock it to this day.
With that in mind, let’s take a look at what those same people consider “smart power.” USA Today:
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s choice of the term “degrade” to describe an attack on Syria has been interpreted by Pentagon planners as guidance for a limited strike, according to senior military officials…
The strike, as envisioned, would be limited in the number of targets and done within a day or two. It could be completed in one fell swoop with missiles, said one senior official familiar with the weapons involved. A smaller, follow-on strike could be launched if targets aren’t sufficiently damaged.
A second senior official, who has seen the most recent planning, offered this metaphor to describe such a strike: If Assad is eating Cheerios, we’re going to take away his spoon and give him a fork. Will that degrade his ability to eat Cheerios? Yes. Will it deter him? Maybe. But he’ll still be able to eat Cheerios.
Oh. Okay.
So… Assad will still be able to “eat Cheerios” (do what he’s been doing), but instead of using a “spoon” (his current infrastructure), he’ll have to use a “fork” (whatever he has left after the “incredibly small” strike that Sec. Kerry has promised).
So then, like, when he’s done eating, he’ll have to drink all the milk out of the bowl, and he doesn’t have a chin, so it’ll go down the front of his shirt and everybody will laugh at him. Do not mess with America, pal!
It’s weird that these senior officials wanted to remain anonymous. If I had come up with something that good, I’d want credit for it. Way to show Rumsfeld and the rest of those dummies how it’s done.
To Damascus!
@jtLOL pic.twitter.com/7ADg1F2Exv
— Matthew H. (@Matthops82) September 9, 2013
In other news: The more Obama talks, the less the American people agree with him. This time, the subject is Syria.
Over just the past week, the share of Americans who oppose U.S. airstrikes in Syria has surged 15 points, from 48% to 63%, as many who were undecided about the issue have turned against military action.
At this rate, by the time Obama finishes his Oval Office speech Tuesday night, most Americans will want Syria to invade us.
(Hat tip: Daniel Halper)