Obama wants to launch attacks but wants the Congress to authorize them.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-to-make-1-15-p-m--statement-on-syria-161723103.html

Excuse me but wasn't this the same thing GWB did and was severely criticized for? And wasn't Obama one of the ones criticizing GWB? Also does this mean we're going to war with/against Syria? I'm so confused.

 

Yes.
Yes.
Yes, if Congress approves it. This will be hotly debated, but I think it will be a go... by a slim margin.

You won't hear me defend Obama much, but there is undeniable proof of WMD usage in this case. Iraq may have hidden their chemical weapons, but because the U.S. never found any, it made Bush look bad.

 

I believe it should require letters of marque, reprisal, or relation from out federal Congress.

 

The big question is if Obama will attack even if congress says no.
Will he become another Bush or not?
I'm guessing he learned some from Bush's mistakes.

 

Lets think how this thing could develope into a war,

US bombs Syria,

Upon command either Syria or Hizbi will bomb Israel, Israel bombs back

Now the only way for Assad to live throu this is to suck it up and do nothing, cause even if he (+ his allies) do damage Israel, there is no way he will survive.

Lets not forget that his survivel is the objective of his allies, considering war might well break if he doesnt, I dare say his survivel is important to the west as well (probebly not to Saudia and Quatar), so this "OP" of shooting a few missles would have sent a messege nothing more.

 

I don't care much for Obama, but then again I didn't care much for Bush either. But by Barack tossing this hot potato [of his own cooking] into the lap of Congress he has made himself look like a statesman rather than the foreign policy bungler that he really is simply by suddenly rediscovering the fact that in theory Congress is actually supposed to give the sitting president a yea or nay on acts of war . . . and attacking Syria for whatever reason Barack can devise is an act of war, regardless of the response of the Syrians. So you have you have a foreign-policy-stupid Obama being a brilliant politician simply by dropping all this into the lap of a shocked legislative Branch.

It's brilliant because immediately Obama is moved out of the category of loud-mouthed and clueless shouter of 'red Line' bravado -- having to essentially go it alone because he has no ability to form international coalitions -- and into the category of thoughtful and respectful Constitutional Law scholar, who grasps the vital roll the Legislative Branch plays in giving the 'go ahead' to acts of war.

Suddenly it becomes the legislative branch's problem shared with Barack Obama rather than a problem of Barack's sole devising caused by the fact that he is at heart a clueless and arrogant narcissist as a president.

Well played Mr. President! Now if only you could learn how to actually be an effective president rather than just a gamesplayer nominally way out of his depth in this office.

 

GWB got permission to go after Iraq if they did not allow inspectors in, the inspectors were allowed in and found no signs of WMD, at that point Bush should of backed off, no way we should of put Afghanistan on hold and started a 10+ year war with Iraq

now as a comparison it would be like the UN investigating the use of Chemical weapons and finding it was not them, and then Obama telling the inspectors to get out fast cause were going to war anyways

.

 

Confused, listen to Lincoln ,You can Fool all the People Some of the Time ,Some all the Time ,but Never all all the time.Excuse Paraphrasing.

As a Foreign Observer of some Century of Modern US History ,Boston ,was not long ago,Occupied by a Tyrants Heel!

Things ,thought unheard of ,or dreamt by ANY ,US President or Confederate ,for that Matter,except the Government of a Certain Person ,who will remain Nameless ,other then BIG BROTHER Pennsylvania Ave Washington D.C, somewhere in the USA!

 

I repeat my comments from another thread, this one having a more relevant topic heading;

Assad is no saint- nobody is, of course- but it's the principal of law which requires defending in Syria. Without it assassins rule and the Middle East will be saddled with Zionism for far longer than it need be. So make your choice, law or criminality. The Brits made theirs, Obama has passed the buck and we await to see what the Israel Lobby tells Congress to do. Forget any other interested party. The decision on US of AIPAC action/inaction is currently being taken in Israel. Here's how it is being sold to you;

Obama has, in effect, left the decision on- illegal- American participation to Netanyahu and his henchmen. Anybody who wants to argue to the contrary is simply being a good neoZionist Internet lemming. Let's watch it unfold.

 

I would be inclined to agree.......if the outcome of the debate wasn't a foregone conclusion. Congress dances to the tune of a foreign power. That's a very difficult concept for Americans to swallow and it is therefore sugar-coated and rolled in the molasses of ' national security '. That's no different from ' Israel's security ' as the announcements , speeches, laws and activities of a string of AIPAC-dependent administrations testifies. The question is - ' Does the regime in the Knesset want a display of US fire-power and a demonstration of US satellite-surveillance technology in its own backyard ' ? Congress will vote according to that, not according to the will of the Americans it is charged to represent.

 

Will Obama become Bush? It's like asking if a sparrow will become an eagle... thank you for the laugh

 

I disagree, Moon - the outcome of the debate is NOT a foregone conclusion. And at this point, Obama does not really care what the Congress' decision will be. If it is a GO, Obama is happy as he's seen as a great Leader, obeying the Constitution, and he cannot be blamed for the outcome of the war. If it's a NO GO, Obama is happy as he can now blame Republicans in Congress for every death in Syria and the Middle East. It's a win-win for Obama; I'm surprised, you do not see it for what it is. Obama is a wimp.

 

Yes Dutch, but Obama is a brilliant wimp. He's a weasel and many other things including a total dud in the negotiations department. But what he's got a great grasp of is how to 'pass the buck' so that his endless screw-ups become the property of somebody else.

 

It's not quite as simple as that Moon. While some members of the Legislative Branch indeed do whatever they are told by outsiders others are pretty much independent operators who won't be told at all, not even by their own party leadership. So we won't know the outcome until that branch of government reaches an official decision. I think that the majority probably will end up rubber stamping Obama's plan simply because the majority of upper level politicians are spineless idiots. But you never know.

 

Yes Obama knows how to have the cake and eat it (at the same time).

 

Yes, you're right imo. It doesn't matter to him personally what Congress decides. The wrath of the Israel Lobby won't fall on him- and thanks is never forthcoming anyway. He has designated responsibilities to Netanyahu.

 

With respect, that boils down to Congress following the Israeli nod. Let's see the colour of the rhetoric emanating from Hasbara Central.

What's the colour of the rhetoric from AIPAC ?

 

Four days ago;

Obama was rudderless.

 

People that think Israel controls the US are pretty dimwitted and good for a laugh. Anyway, a no vote will mean that the world doesn't care if civilians are gassed to death by governments and this give a green light for Israel to gas Gaza to extinction, but also the green light for Iran to gas Israel. The effects of that would be iffy, though, since most Israelis have gas masks and safe rooms.

 

Think about it. This will be the green light for China to exterminate the Uighurs and Uins, for Russia to end Chechnya, for Yemen to end its rebels....This could be a major turning point in world history.

 

They certainly are. On the other hand, people that think the Israel Lobby controls Washington are shining beacons of intellect, by comparison.

Thinking about it, the US government actually applauded when the neoZionists killed 1400 Palestinians over christmas, 2008/9- including 400 children. It vetoed any UN admonishment of neoZionist fascism. Why is it concerned over 1400 dead Syrians ? Is it the manner of their deaths, do you think ? Nerve agents as opposed to HE and white phosphorous ?

 

When the Bible talks of a third of humans, fishes, animals and all living things sickening and dying, this could be what it is referring to.

 

I guess we will see if they are concerned when they go back into session on September 9 to discuss this issue and what to do, or not do.

Like I said, maybe we will do nothing....maybe nobody will do anything and Governments gassing opposition civilian populations will become an accepted norm.

 

Who wrote that particular passage ?

 

It wont come to this but agree with your comment on Israel control over US anf the grin light it gives some dictators in the world and let's face it, Assad would never have used Chemical weapons if GWB was president...

I aslo think that in pressure tems on the US, Turkey andJordan pressure much more than Israel as they have 2,000,000 new mouths to feed and the number is rising daily.