Obama Will Seek Congressional Approval for Military Actions in Syria

[metaldog]

I see a double standard here. Obama is seeking congressional approval on Syria, when he "trumped" them with Libya. Then he was (in his own words) granted approval by the U.N. So whats his reason for not attempting the same stunt this time around?
“This menace must be confronted,” Obama said of the Assad regime’s alleged chemical attack, speaking from the Rose Garden.

Read more: President Obama turns to Congress to OK strike against Syria | Fox News

IMO, Obama is the menace!

 

[yepthatsme]

I want to know what he is trying to cover up this time. It doesn't surprise me that he has created this situation as a ruse to take our focus off of other scandals or is there a new scandal he does not want us to see? I put nothing past him.

 

[Hoosierkav]

By punting to Congress, and allowing them to be weak, uncaring, sitting by while hundreds of children die, when the next gas attack occurs, which will surely be much more gruesome and "surely now we must do something" (maybe of a school or something, since dead children sell better than dead adults), it will be Congress' fault.

Basin of water with which to wash one's hands is standing at podium left.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Can anybody tell me why we MUST take part in this? I just don't get it. We'll bomb them and then pay to repair everything. Again, I just don't get it.

I've yet to see a coherent argument as to why. If its about punishing someone for using chemical weapons...well, we didn't go in to Iraq when they gassed Iran. Or the Kurds. We sorta kinda mentioned it when we decided we needed to invade but not when it was actually occurring. As far as killing civilians, well, a few thousand is a drop in the bucket compared to the atrocities on civilian populations that are ongoing on the African continent and in certain Asian countries.

Syria isn't our friend. They are Iran's proxy in the neighborhood. When I was contracting I visited a multitude of Arabic countries. I really wanted to see Damascus, but the threat level was so high that even my Chechnyan friend said it was stupid to go and I should probably just tour Jordan instead and not risk getting my head cut off for a Youtube video. He seemed to know what he was talking about when he gave advice. I stayed in Jordan.

Getting involved with Syria seems like getting involved with a war between different hives of hornets. How do you pick which hive is the friendly one? Will they remember how friendly you were after the other hornets are gone?

 

[Jerchap2]

 

[IrishSon of Liberty]

This is brilliant! With his statement today, Assad knows he's free to move things around his country until our Congress reconvenes and holds a vote. Likewise, he's appeasing the Rebels, or U.S. backed Al Qaeda, by positioning six ships within range. We all know that Washington is corrupt and the vote will turn out in favor of military action. If and when that happens, the media will use it as a sign of America's support for President Barack Obama and his decisons.

 

[Designer99]

Can anybody tell me why we MUST take part in this? I just don't get it. We'll bomb them and then pay to repair everything. Again, I just don't get it.

Logistics. We want to secure the real estate for alternative oil pipelines. Syria refused to let us have it for years. Now, were going to take it under the guise of outrage over chemical weapons. If we don't, Russia and Iran have their own pipeline planned.

"The main goal of this project is to route the Israeli and Qatari gas to the European continent for distribution throughout Europe, with a threefold objective. The first: break the Russian gas monopoly in Europe. The second: to liberate Turkey from its dependence on Iranian gas. The third: give Israel a chance to export its gas to Europe by land."

Syria: The path of the pipeline | Peace . Gold . Liberty

Syria intervention plans fuelled by oil interests, not chemical weapon concerns | Nafeez Ahmed | Environment | theguardian.com


...Or we can go with the 20 second dumbed down local news version that Assaud is a bad man that is so crazy, he gassed his own people and we're not going to stand for this violation of human rights!

 

[Jerchap2]

 

[Jerchap2]

 

[Tombs]

IMHO, if we do go in, it could be the fuse that lights what is already a powder keg and have a series of unintended consequences that nobody will be able to control.

Exactly... And a lot of people have it backwards.

The US is viewed as arrogant, violent, and hypocritical in the rest of the world, people stop caring about their lives and want to attack us because they believe we will eventually kill them anyway. Once the interventionalist mindset is finally dropped for good, the US's reputation will be vastly repaired and negativity towards us will diminish. You can be a benefit to the world without playing nanny, upsetting foreign politics, and policing countries that aren't yours. You don't have to be an isolationist to stop picking a fight with everyone who looks at you wrong. You especially don't need to justify doing this with silly high-horse elitism.

The sun still rises in the morning. That's one thing our politicians can not seem to learn from life, either that or military contractors have had them bent over since ww2 ended.

The greatest lie of all time has to be that the world is complicated and you can't hope to understand these things. No, the world is simple and people are simple, it's just presented as complicated to keep you going about your business and to not voice your opinion.

 

[jbombelli]

Obama has to go to Congress. This way they can be for it, before they are against it, continue to fund it anyway, and deflect all responsibility back to someone who can't run again. And in the end? WE are the ones who will be held responsible.

Sound familiar? It should.

 

[mrjarrell]

According to King and Inhofe the answer to Obama's request may well be no.

Peter King, Jim Inhofe: Congress Will Vote No on Syria | Mediaite

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ok, so aside from all the belief that there's something sinister going on, it IS a good thing that he's asking for congressional approval, right? Sure he stepped on his **** with that idiotic "redline"comment, but I not going to fault someone for following the Constitution, regardless of other people's beliefs concerning the motives.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Now we can't roast people alive because the Congress won't approve dropping more bombs on them? Aww.
I'm disappointed. This policy of 'bomb ******* everyone' has been working SO well for the past decade!
Laissez le bon temps rouler! Let's get 'er done! "Bring it on!" "Mission accomplished!" Let's go for the gold!
Sea of glass; wall-to-wall carpeting! Let's do this!

 

[WWalker]

Ron Paul: 'reckless and immoral' for U.S. to intervene in Syria | The Daily Caller