• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporval

Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

polgara said:
Son of a gun! Congress is to be the culprit again if BHO doesn't get to do what he wants to do? Whodathunk? And what's with Biden's comment? Following the law suddenly seems to be a very serious matter! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I think it all boils down to the fact that he doesn't want to have anything to do with Syria, other than seeing intel about the civil war, when he glances at his daily intelligence, briefing, one or two days a week.

He let his narssissm get the best of him with his red line comment. He believed too much of his own press and thought everyone respected and adored him as much as the American media does.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Snappo said:
I suspect you hate Obama because you are pro GOP and hate anyone who is part of the DNC. That having been said, I think Obama is doing a great job, much prefer him to McSame & Juggs or to Romney & Lyin' Ryan. Kerry is a solid Secretary of State, as was Clinton. I'm not in love with Biden the liar; but that's a story for another day. I could care less what the world thinks of USA as long as they aren't trying to attack her or her citizens. And if they hate us so much they should tell us to pull our troops out of NATO and stop accepting our free money, free arms, or even our commerce. That would be fine and dandy. Until then; the world is a bunch of butt kissing hypocrites that suck off the teet of the US Taxpayers and US Workforce.
Click to expand...

Naw. I just hate what he has done and is doing to our country. And unfortunately what the rest of the world thinks of us becomes very important when our President has made us the laughing stock of the world. It creates a slew of additional problems.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Sherman123 said:
I think he is making a mistake. The embarrassment from a Congressional
defeat could be extraordinary. There is ample precedent in history for a limited military intervention without Congressional authorization going all the way back to Jefferson. If he thought it was necessary (and I agree that it is) he should have taken quick and decisive action.
Click to expand...


It' s a mistake either way, and this whole Syrian " red line " issue shows why its important to elect a real leader.

Not someone who bases their opinion and actions on political popularity.

This is amatuer hour for our Nation.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Snappo said:
I'm kind of blown away about us backing Al Qaeda too.
Click to expand...

Well now.

LOL. And you claim I hate Obama because he is not GOP. LOL.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Jredbaron96 said:
Obama: US should take military action against Syria - CNN.com



Obama is now seeking Congressional approval for strikes against Syria.

Thoughts? Comments? Another date, my love?
Click to expand...

Why didn't President Obama seek congressional approval for his Libyan operations. Libya involved a whole lot more than a little Sryian attack will. It is stuff like this that leaves me scratching my head.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Perotista said:
Why didn't President Obama seek congressional approval for his Libyan operations. Libya involved a whole lot more than a little Sryian attack will. It is stuff like this that leaves me scratching my head.
Click to expand...

He said he was acting under the authority of enforcing a UN or NATO treaty.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Perotista said:
Why didn't President Obama seek congressional approval for his Libyan operations. Libya involved a whole lot more than a little Sryian attack will. It is stuff like this that leaves me scratching my head.
Click to expand...

Oh. You are one of those guys that expect things to make sense from a Presidential administration. Funny. The rest of the world does too.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Perotista said:
Why didn't President Obama seek congressional approval for his Libyan operations. Libya involved a whole lot more than a little Sryian attack will. It is stuff like this that leaves me scratching my head.
Click to expand...

You and a whole lot of other people! :thumbs:
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Knowing Congress the bill will go through committee.

It'll be 3 months before they vote on it.

Itll have something attached to it that makes pharmaceutical companies immune from lawsuits at the last second by an anonymous congress person, recognize some random American for producing the most potatoes in a district this year and proclaim pink slime a fruit.

God bless America
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

polgara said:
Good evening, bubba! :2wave:

You have illustrated an excellent point! Too much talking, and very little doing going on! Has everyone tuned out the blah blah blah? :wow:
Click to expand...

Hi Pol ... I'm not even sure anyone should be doing anything but there's such a thing as not doing anything for the wrong reasons. Know what I mean?
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Fenton said:
It' s a mistake either way, and this whole Syrian " red line " issue shows why its important to elect a real leader.

Not someone who bases their opinion and actions on political popularity.

This is amatuer hour for our Nation.
Click to expand...

Intervention in Syria is not popular in the United States, so how is he basing his opinion on political popularity?
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

ecofarm said:
He said he was acting under the authority of enforcing a UN or NATO treaty.
Click to expand...

Sounds more like an excuse to me to bypass congress.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Guy Incognito said:
You both are. This is going to get wide support now.
Click to expand...

It is like the situation is using all elements that USA and NATO dislikes. You want to help people from being gassed to death and this means going after Assad. But fighters against Assad are Al-Qaeda while those pro him are Russians, Iranians, and Assad himself.

So if it gains support now it should either be to cover the "red line" face. Or it should be longer than kicking Assad. See after he goes it should be Al-Qaeda's turn, unless they suddenly turn blue.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Perotista said:
Sounds more like an excuse to me to bypass congress.
Click to expand...

WPA gives 90 days?
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

ItAin'tFree said:
Oh. You are one of those guys that expect things to make sense from a Presidential administration. Funny. The rest of the world does too.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I have been fairly satisfied with the President's foreign policy. Libya wasn't one of them though.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

I say we let the Frenchies pull another NATO treaty enforcement and put the people in charge of Syria.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Wiggen said:
The War Powers act permits the President to take military action. He said so
himself in his speech today. It does not, however, mandate that he takes military action without Congressional approval. I think its a great idea to get the issue debated in Congress and then let's see a vote.
Click to expand...

Yes because the "trial balloon" of action minus Congressional approval didn't go over to well.

It's too close to the 2014 midterms for Democrats to make ANOTHER Foreign Policy mistake.

At least this way he has someone to blame
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

polgara said:
You and a whole lot of other people! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

The thing is the President could have obtained congressional approval. The votes were there.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

ecofarm said:
WPA gives 90 days?
Click to expand...

You lost me on this one. WPA sounds like one of FDR's three letter organizations. CCC, TVA etc.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Basically, you have Assad, Russia, and Iran on one side, and Al-Qaeda on the other. The people are in between. In order to liberate this one, both sides should go!

By my own experience I know there are some whom are praying the USA and allies are resolved to intervene for it is costing their civilian lives. Some media as propagated from Russians are usually lies for they tend to support the most vicious criminals that exist in power. Some Syrians may hope desperately that we would not buy it.

I hope the intervention would reach them and they would seek freedom from religious extremism after Assad. Not to mention that even achieving Assad's downfall is no longer as easy. You have Obama's "Just a few missiles" request and a resolved bully Putin saying that he may even bomb Saudis.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Perotista said:
You lost me on this one. WPA sounds like one of FDR's three letter organizations. CCC, TVA etc.
Click to expand...

Meant this:

The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war.
Click to expand...
War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On Friday, June 3, 2011, the US House of Representatives voted to rebuke President Obama for maintaining an American presence in the NATO operations in Libya, which they considered a violation of the War Powers Resolution.[14][15]
Click to expand...

After 60 (90?) days, Obama claimed authority via the enforcement of a treaty.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

ecofarm said:
Meant this:


War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


After 60 (90?) days, Obama claimed authority via the enforcement of a treaty.
Click to expand...

I got you. So simple and yet the brain makes it so difficult. I never really thought about the WPA. Personally, I would like to see the WPA repealed. But that is me.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Perotista said:
I got you. So simple and yet the brain makes it so difficult. I never really thought about the WPA. Personally, I would like to see the WPA repealed. But that is me.
Click to expand...

So he could use the WPR, or NATO enforcement as he did last time.
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

Slyfox696 said:
I don't understand why the President should be embarrassed because Congress votes against what he'd like to see them say. Why would that be embarrassing?

If anything, I think this is very much a move to AVOID embarrassment. If Obama strikes without Congressional approval, it will be viewed quite unfavorably. If Obama doesn't strike, then his "red line" comment, which has been blown way out of proportion in my opinion, then becomes the embarrassing moment.

I think this move takes the burden off Obama and puts it onto Congress.
Click to expand...

Spot on. This is the best of multiple and choices for him politically. The "red line" comment backed him into a hit of a corner with ad answers all around...this is the best of the bad ones

Because he didn't do this for Lybia, and the congressional republicans asked for him to do it this time, if they go along with it then they can play off that he saw the wisdom of their argument...but it at least takes it away as a method to attack
 
Re: Obama: "US should take military action against Syria", seeks Congressional Apporv

ecofarm said:
So he could use the WPR, or NATO enforcement as he did last time.
Click to expand...

I suppose he could, but in my view, it still doesn't make it right. But this time, I have the feeling the president is looking for a way around his red line. By going to congress and having them vote down the use of force... Well you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom