Democrats and Republicans think US closer to arming Syrian rebels, after Israeli strikes

• 

Congressional Democrats and Republicans said Sunday that Israel’s recent airstrikes on Syria show President Assad's air defense system is not impenetrable, with one lawmaker suggesting the United States establish a no-fly zone over the Middle East country.

Israel on Sunday launched its second airstrike in three days in the Syrian capital of Damascus, targeting a shipment of guided Iranian-made missiles intended for the militant group Hezbollah, said an intelligence official in the Middle East.

A senior Israeli official told the Associated Press both airstrikes targeted shipments of Fateh-110 missiles bound for Hezbollah. The Iranian-made guided missiles can fly deep into Israel and deliver powerful half-ton bombs with pinpoint accuracy. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing a covert military operation.

The attacks mark a sharp escalation of Israel's involvement in Syria's bloody civil war, which has claimed roughly 70,000 people. Assad has been accused of using SCUD missiles and chemical weapons against civilians in the uprising.

The White House declined for a second day to comment directly on the strikes, but said Obama believes Israel, as a sovereign nation, has the right to defend itself against threats from Hezbollah.

President Obama has said Assad’s use of chemical weapons would cross a red line, but has not taken action beyond giving humanitarian aid and money to rebel forces for defensive military equipment. However, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said last week the administration is reconsidering its opposition to arming the rebel forces.

“The red line that the president of the United States [has] was apparently written in disappearing ink,” Arizona Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, told “Fox News Sunday.” “We need a game-changing action.”

McCain suggested the U.S. establish a “safe zone” and give weapons to “the right people” but repeated that American soldiers should not enter the country.

He also said the Israeli strikes “will probably put more pressure on this administration” to act.

Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy also suggested that Syria’s Russian-made air-defense system was not as solid as thought and suggested the U.S. is getting closer to arming rebel forces.

“The idea of getting weapons in, if we know the right people to get them, my guess is we will give them to them,” he said on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”

Arkansas Republican Rep. Tom Cotton told NBC the U.S. should have started arming pro-Western rebel forces “months ago” and suggest the U.S. consider blocking Syrian air space.

“We have to arm the opposition,” he said. “I think we also need to move toward imposing a no-fly zone.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

View the original article here

Democrats and Republicans think US closer to arming Syrian rebels, after Israeli strikes

• 

Congressional Democrats and Republicans said Sunday that Israel’s recent airstrikes on Syria show President Bashar Assad's air defense system is not impenetrable, with one lawmaker suggesting the United States establish a no-fly zone over the Middle East country.

Israel on Sunday launched its second airstrike in three days in the Syrian capital of Damascus, targeting a shipment of guided Iranian-made missiles intended for a militant group, said an intelligence official in the Middle East.

The attacks mark a sharp escalation of Israel's involvement in Syria's bloody civil war, which has claimed roughly 70,000 people. Assad has been accused of using SCUD missiles and chemical weapons against civilians in the uprising.

President Obama has said Assad’s use of chemical weapons would cross a red line.

He has not taken action beyond giving humanitarian aid and money to rebel forces for defensive military equipment. However, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said last week the administration is reconsidering its opposition to arming the rebel forces.

“The red line that the president of the United States [has] was apparently written in disappearing ink,” Arizona Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, told “Fox News Sunday.” “We need a game-changing action.”

McCain suggested the U.S. establish a “safe zone” and give weapons to “the right people” but repeated that American soldiers should not enter the country.

He also said the Israeli strikes “will probably put more pressure on this administration” to act.

Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy also suggested that Syria’s Russian-made air-defense system was not as solid as thought and suggested the U.S. is getting closer to arming rebel forces.

“The idea of getting weapons in, if we know the right people to get them, my guess is we will give them to them,” he said on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”

Arkansas Republican Rep. Tom Cotton told NBC the U.S. should have started arming pro-Western rebel forces “months ago” and suggest the U.S. consider blocking Syrian air space.

“We have to arm the opposition,” he said. “I think we also need to move toward imposing a no-fly zone.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

View the original article here

NASA plans to lasso asteroid, bring it closer to Earth, senator says

• 

  Jan. 13, 2013: The Orion Exploration Flight Test 1crew module is seen in the Operations and Checkout building during a media tour at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla.AP

WASHINGTON –  NASA is planning for a robotic spaceship to lasso a small asteroid and park it near the moon for astronauts to explore, a top senator said Friday.

The ship would capture the 500-ton, 25-foot asteroid in 2019. Then using an Orion space capsule, a crew of about four astronauts would nuzzle up next to the rock in 2021 for spacewalking exploration, according to a government document obtained by The Associated Press.

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said the plan would speed up by four years the existing mission to land astronauts on an asteroid by bringing the space rock closer to Earth.

Nelson, who is chairman of the Senate science and space subcommittee, said Friday that President Barack Obama is putting $100 million in planning money for the accelerated asteroid mission in the 2014 budget that comes out next week. The money would be used to find the right small asteroid.

"It really is a clever concept," Nelson said in a press conference in Orlando. "Go find your ideal candidate for an asteroid. Go get it robotically and bring it back."

This would be the first time ever humanity has manipulated a space object in such a grand scale, like what it does on Earth, said Robert Braun, a Georgia Institute of Technology aerospace engineering professor who used to be NASA's chief technology officer.

"It's a great combination of our robotic and human capabilities to do the kind of thing that NASA should be doing in this century," Braun said.

Last year, the Keck Institute for Space Studies proposed a similar mission for NASA with a price tag of $2.6 billion. There is no cost estimate for the space agency's version. NASA's plans were first reported by Aviation Week.

While there are thousands of asteroids around 25-feet, finding the right one that comes by Earth at just the right time to be captured will not be easy, said Donald Yeomans, who heads NASA's Near Earth Object program that monitors close-by asteroids. He said once a suitable rock is found it would be captured with the space equivalent of "a baggie with a drawstring. You bag it. You attach the solar propulsion module to de-spin it and bring it back to where you want it."

Yeomans said a 25-foot asteroid is no threat to Earth because it would burn up should it inadvertently enter Earth's atmosphere. These types of asteroids are closer to Earth — not in the main asteroid belt between Jupiter and Mars. They're less than 10 million miles away, Braun said.

"It's probably the right size asteroid to be practicing on," he said.

A 25-foot asteroid is smaller than the size rock that caused a giant fireball that streaked through the sky in Russia in February, said Apollo 9 astronaut Rusty Schweickart, head of the B612 Foundation, a nonprofit concerned about dangerous space rocks.

The robotic ship would require a high-tech solar engine to haul the rock through space, something that is both cutting-edge and doable, Braun said. Then NASA would use a new large rocket and the Orion capsule — both under development — to send astronauts to the asteroid.

There would be no gravity on the asteroid so the astronauts would have to hover over it in an extended spacewalk.

Exploring the asteroid "would be great fun," Schweickart said. "You'd have some interesting challenges in terms of operating in an environment like that."

Nelson said the mission would help NASA develop the capability to nudge away a dangerous asteroid if one headed to Earth in the future. It also would be training for a future mission to send astronauts to Mars in the 2030s, he said. But while it would be helpful for planetary defense, "that's not your primary mission," Schweickart said.

George Washington University Space Policy Institute Director Scott Pace, a top NASA official during the George W. Bush administration, was critical of the plan, saying it was a bad idea scientifically and for international cooperation.

Instead, NASA and other countries should first join forces for a comprehensive survey of all possible dangerous space rocks, Pace said.

The government document describing the mission said it would inspire because it "will send humans farther than they have ever been before."

View the original article here

Lawmakers, officials list problems cuts would bring, but appear no closer to compromise

Lawmakers from the White House to Capitol Hill to the Western Plains agree that the fast-approaching, $85 billion in cuts to the federal budget jeopardize everything from combat readiness to pre-K programs. But they also express little optimism about a deal to avert the reductions before they kick in Friday.  

All of them made their case over the weekend for President Obama along with congressional Democrats and Republicans to reach a budget deal to avert the cuts -- known as sequester. However, both parties accused each other of extending the stalemate.

“It will kick in,” Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn told “Fox News Sunday.”  "The reason there is no agreement is because there's no leadership from the president on actually recognizing what the problem is."

He was joined on Fox by Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, who agreed the cuts would occur -- “unless the Republicans are willing to compromise and do a balanced approach.”

Congress agreed to the massive, across-the-board cuts in 2011 after failing to reach a deal on more measured reductions.

Should no deal be reached, the government will be forced to make drastic cuts with hardly any leeway to save some programs.

This would lead to furloughs for hundreds of thousands of workers at such agencies as the Transportation and Defense departments and would impact such parts of the everyday American life as commercial air travel and federal meat inspections.

President Obama during a weekly address said congressional Republicans could easily stop the cuts by agreeing to close tax loopholes that protect the wealthiest Americans.

“Unfortunately, it appears that Republicans in Congress have decided that instead of compromising -- instead of asking anything of the wealthiest Americans-- they would rather let these cuts fall squarely on the middle class.”

Maryland Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley called the cuts “senseless.”

"And it's a damn shame because we've actually had the fastest rate of jobs recovery of any state in our region,” he said Saturday during the winter meeting of the National Governors Association.

House Republicans have said reduced spending needs to be the focus and have rejected the president's demand to include higher taxes as part of a compromise. They say legislation passed in early January already raises taxes on the wealthiest Americans to generate an estimated $600 billion for the Treasury over a decade.  

Some governors said the budget impasse was just the latest crisis in Washington that is keeping businesses from hiring and undermining the ability of governors to develop state spending plans.

"I've not given up hope, but we're going to be prepared for whatever comes," said Nevada's Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval said Saturday. "There will be consequences for our state."

Several Cabinet secretaries also went on the Sunday television talk shows to warn of the approaching economic fallout.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan said 70,000 fewer children from low-income families would have access to pre-kindergarten Head Start early education programs. Furloughed meat inspectors could leave plants idled.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood warned that travelers could face delays because the Federal Aviation Administration is in line for $600 million in spending cuts.

He told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the Transportation Department would not compromise safety but acknowledged air traffic controllers could be furloughed.

Top Republicans on Senate and House transportation and aviation panels accused the administration of raising an unnecessary alarm.

"Before jumping to the conclusion that furloughs must be implemented, the administration and the agency need to sharpen their pencils and consider all the options," the lawmakers said in a joint statement.

The cuts would trim from domestic and defense spending alike. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said the cuts would harm the readiness of U.S. fighting forces. He said the "vast majority" of the Defense Department's 800,000 civilian workers would have to lose one day of work per week, or 20 percent of their pay, for up to 22 weeks, probably starting in late April.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, called those defense cuts "unconscionable" and urged Obama to call lawmakers to the White House or the presidential retreat of Camp David for a last-minute budget summit.

"I won't put all the blame all on the president of the United States,” he said. “But the president leads. The president should be calling us over somewhere -- Camp David, the White House, somewhere -- and us sitting down and trying to avert these cuts."

LaHood also urged his colleagues to watch "Lincoln," Steven Spielberg's film about President Abraham Lincoln's political skills.

"Everybody around here ought to go take a look at the 'Lincoln' movie, where they did very hard things by working together, talking together and compromising," he said. "That's what's needed here."

But there are few signs of urgency among congressional leaders, who have recently indicated their willingness to let the cuts take effect and stay in place for weeks, if not much longer.

The sequester cuts, with few exceptions, are designed to hit all accounts equally. The law gives Obama little leeway to ease the pain. Even if granted flexibility to apply the cuts with more discretion -- a legislative step Republicans said Sunday they might pursue -- White House officials say that would still require severe reductions.

View the original article here