- Unbeliebable: White House turns Bieber petition response into immigration screed
- Obama signs law denying Iran ambassador’s visa, but says law is ‘advisory’
- Mich. judge to laughing convicted killer: ‘I hope you die in prison’
- Man charged in Kansas City-area highway shootings
- Keystone XL pipeline still on hold after State Dept. decision
- Fla. man charged with killing 16-month-old son to play Xbox undisturbed
- Drones from the deep: Pentagon develops ocean-floor attack robots
- Michigan mayor slaps back atheists’ try to erect ‘reason station’ at city hall
- PHILLIPS: Where is the conservative establishment?
- 7.5-magnitude earthquake shakes southern Mexico
Cruise missiles unlikely to deter Syrian regime, analysts say
Tomahawks lack bunker-busting ability, poor on mobile targets
“We continue to refine our targeting based on the most recent intelligence, and the [Joint Chiefs] chairman assured the president that we would have appropriate targeting options ready when he called for them,” said Air Force Col. Ed Thomas, spokesman for Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “We will remain ready to execute military options whenever the president directs it.”
The aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and four other ships in its strike group moved into the Red Sea early Monday, U.S. defense officials said, describing the move as “prudent planning” in case the ships are needed for action against Syria.
Meanwhile, five Navy destroyers, submarines and an amphibious assault ship with Marines on board remain ready in the eastern Mediterranean.
Military officials acknowledge that a one-time operation might not be enough to deter the Assad regime.
“It is not that we will punch them in the nose and run away. We will punch them in the nose and ask, ‘Do you want more?’” an unnamed U.S. defense official said in a story Saturday in The Wall Street Journal.
Gen. Dempsey himself has advocated several times against direct intervention in Syria, writing in a July 19 letter to the Senate: “Once we take action, we should be prepared for what comes next. Deeper involvement is hard to avoid.”
“As we weigh our options, we should be able to conclude with some confidence that the use of force will move us toward the intended outcome,” he wrote.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Kristina Wong is a national security reporter for The Washington Times, covering defense, foreign policy and intelligence affairs. She can be reached at email@example.com.
- Despite Pentagon cuts and eye on Pacific, Air Force implored to save the 'Warthog'
- Pentagon welcomes budget deal but says more defense spending needed
- Rep. Hunter to Pentagon: Don't lower combat standards for women
- Scientists raise alarm over plan to destroy Syria's chemical weapons at sea
- Hagel renews Qatar defense pact despite differences over Iran, Syria
TWT Video Picks
Women losing coverage under Obamacare, too
- Scalia to students on high taxes: At a certain point, 'perhaps you should revolt'
- Former Ranger breaks silence on Pat Tillman death: I may have killed him
- Special Forces' suicide rates hit record levels casualties of 'hard combat'
- Feds approve powdered alcohol; 'Palcohol' available later this year
- Nancy Pelosi washes immigrants' feet in humble Holy Week act then promotes on Twitter
- Justice at last: 'Evil woman' outed for grabbing girl's game ball
- Army goes to war with National Guard, seizes Apache attack helicopters
- Russian fighter jet buzzes U.S. Navy destroyer in Black Sea
- EDITORIAL: Mark Warner running scared?
- Harry Reid blasts Bundy ranch supporters as 'domestic terrorists'
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.